Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Seizure of Indian Rupees under PMLA, 2002 due to alleged involvement in Hawala transaction. Appellant argued not being accused in FIR or ECIR, thus seizure u/s 17 not valid. However, evidence indicated Hawala transaction of Rs.15 Crore and appellant's failure to explain the source of funds. Statement u/s 50 implicated appellant in facilitating transaction. Second argument on bank withdrawals not clarifying legitimate use of funds for foreign exchange. Appellant's involvement in large transactions not substantiated. Appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Seizure of Indian Rupees under PMLA, 2002 due to alleged involvement in Hawala transaction. Appellant argued not being accused in FIR or ECIR, thus seizure u/s 17 not valid. However, evidence indicated Hawala transaction of Rs.15 Crore and appellant's failure to explain the source of funds. Statement u/s 50 implicated appellant in facilitating transaction. Second argument on bank withdrawals not clarifying legitimate use of funds for foreign exchange. Appellant's involvement in large transactions not substantiated. Appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
