Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appellant's premises were searched, leading to the seizure of substantial amounts of foreign currencies and Indian currency. The appellant initially claimed the foreign currencies were unspent balances from trips abroad, but discrepancies were found in the supporting documents. Subsequently, the appellant claimed the foreign currencies were winnings from casinos during foreign trips, but failed to provide proof. The appellant violated regulations by possessing excess US dollars beyond the permissible limit. The explanations provided by the appellant regarding the sources of the seized currencies lacked credibility and were contradictory. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority, finding the appellant failed to provide cogent and reliable evidence to justify the seizures.
The appellant's premises were searched, leading to the seizure of substantial amounts of foreign currencies and Indian currency. The appellant initially claimed the foreign currencies were unspent balances from trips abroad, but discrepancies were found in the supporting documents. Subsequently, the appellant claimed the foreign currencies were winnings from casinos during foreign trips, but failed to provide proof. The appellant violated regulations by possessing excess US dollars beyond the permissible limit. The explanations provided by the appellant regarding the sources of the seized currencies lacked credibility and were contradictory. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority, finding the appellant failed to provide cogent and reliable evidence to justify the seizures.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.