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...
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants were granted the opportunity for cross-examination of material witnesses relied upon by the revenue authorities. This was based on the principle of natural justice, following precedents that denial of cross-examination violates fair procedure u/s 9D of the Central Excise Act. The adjudicating authority must allow cross-examination and follow due process for a fresh decision. The appellants were directed to cooperate for speedy disposal.
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) set aside the impugned order and remanded the cases back to the adjudicating authority. The appellants were granted the opportunity for cross-examination of material witnesses relied upon by the revenue authorities. This was based on the principle of natural justice, following precedents that denial of cross-examination violates fair procedure u/s 9D of the Central Excise Act. The adjudicating authority must allow cross-examination and follow due process for a fresh decision. The appellants were directed to cooperate for speedy disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
