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...
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving silver jewelry manufacturer. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, addressing multiple key issues: (1) goods classified under CETH 7113 without evidence of precious stone studding, (2) compliance with Notification No. 12/2012 exemption conditions, (3) hedging activities not considered trading, (4) no willful suppression of facts justifying extended limitation period, and (5) ineligible credit demand previously dropped. The tribunal comprehensively rejected the revenue's contentions across classification, duty exemption, and credit-related challenges. The appeal was ultimately allowed, substantially vindicating the appellant's legal and procedural positions across multiple contested aspects of the excise duty dispute.
CESTAT appellate proceedings involving silver jewelry manufacturer. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, addressing multiple key issues: (1) goods classified under CETH 7113 without evidence of precious stone studding, (2) compliance with Notification No. 12/2012 exemption conditions, (3) hedging activities not considered trading, (4) no willful suppression of facts justifying extended limitation period, and (5) ineligible credit demand previously dropped. The tribunal comprehensively rejected the revenue's contentions across classification, duty exemption, and credit-related challenges. The appeal was ultimately allowed, substantially vindicating the appellant's legal and procedural positions across multiple contested aspects of the excise duty dispute.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
