Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The case involved a challenge to a penalty imposed u/s 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Acts. The court held that without proof of intent to evade tax, such penalties lack legal basis. The petitioner had presented all documents during seizure, except one, which was later provided. The court found no factual support for the alleged tax evasion intent. The order dated July 20, 2024, was quashed, directing release of the vehicle and goods within two weeks. The High Court disposed of the petition.
The case involved a challenge to a penalty imposed u/s 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Acts. The court held that without proof of intent to evade tax, such penalties lack legal basis. The petitioner had presented all documents during seizure, except one, which was later provided. The court found no factual support for the alleged tax evasion intent. The order dated July 20, 2024, was quashed, directing release of the vehicle and goods within two weeks. The High Court disposed of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
