Infrastructure-development deduction remains available to EPC contractors when substantive statutory conditions outweigh contractor labels in agreemen...
Explained Investment Sources: documented gifts and traceable salary savings supported deletion of additions for property and mutual-fund SIP investmen...
Internal comparable pricing supports arm's-length interest on compulsorily convertible debentures, preventing their recharacterisation as equity for t...
Nominee director protection shields independent financial-institution appointees from criminal liability where they lack involvement in deposit defaul...
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving seized gold bars. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove foreign origin of gold, with purity ranging 995.7 to 998.9. Revenue failed to establish 'reasonable belief' of smuggling under Customs Act. Seizure deemed improper as appellant falls under Section 123(1)(a)(i) as possessor. Tribunal directed opportunity for cross-examination of initial seizure officers and remanded case for fresh adjudication, requiring Adjudicating Authority to comprehensively reassess evidence. Appeal disposed with directions to conduct detailed reexamination, potentially leading to return of seized gold to appellant.
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving seized gold bars. Tribunal found insufficient evidence to prove foreign origin of gold, with purity ranging 995.7 to 998.9. Revenue failed to establish 'reasonable belief' of smuggling under Customs Act. Seizure deemed improper as appellant falls under Section 123(1)(a)(i) as possessor. Tribunal directed opportunity for cross-examination of initial seizure officers and remanded case for fresh adjudication, requiring Adjudicating Authority to comprehensively reassess evidence. Appeal disposed with directions to conduct detailed reexamination, potentially leading to return of seized gold to appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
