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 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.