Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
HC upheld penalty imposed under Punjab VAT Act for tax evasion where goods transported exceeded declared weight and required documentation was not furnished at Inter-State Check Post (ICC). While appellant claimed inability to generate information due to blocked TIN number, subsequent production of retail invoices and GR documents after detention demonstrated clear intent to evade tax. The goods owner's belated submission of documentation violated Section 51(2) requirements for contemporaneous document presentation at ICC. AETC's penalty order under Section 51(7)(c), sustained by VAT Tribunal, was procedurally sound with adequate opportunity for hearing. HC found no grounds to interfere with Tribunal's determination, dismissing the appeal.
HC upheld penalty imposed under Punjab VAT Act for tax evasion where goods transported exceeded declared weight and required documentation was not furnished at Inter-State Check Post (ICC). While appellant claimed inability to generate information due to blocked TIN number, subsequent production of retail invoices and GR documents after detention demonstrated clear intent to evade tax. The goods owner's belated submission of documentation violated Section 51(2) requirements for contemporaneous document presentation at ICC. AETC's penalty order under Section 51(7)(c), sustained by VAT Tribunal, was procedurally sound with adequate opportunity for hearing. HC found no grounds to interfere with Tribunal's determination, dismissing the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.