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 adjudicated a case involving clandestine manufacture and removal of goods, finding critical evidentiary deficiencies. The tribunal invalidated electronic evidence from CDs and pen drives due to non-compliance with Section 36B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Without mandatory certification and corroborative evidence, the department's case collapsed. The tribunal set aside the confirmed duty demands, interest, and penalties against the company. Additionally, the penalty imposed on the company's director was quashed due to lack of substantive evidence. The appeal was ultimately allowed, emphasizing strict procedural requirements for electronic evidence in tax proceedings.
CESTAT adjudicated a case involving clandestine manufacture and removal of goods, finding critical evidentiary deficiencies. The tribunal invalidated electronic evidence from CDs and pen drives due to non-compliance with Section 36B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Without mandatory certification and corroborative evidence, the department's case collapsed. The tribunal set aside the confirmed duty demands, interest, and penalties against the company. Additionally, the penalty imposed on the company's director was quashed due to lack of substantive evidence. The appeal was ultimately allowed, emphasizing strict procedural requirements for electronic evidence in tax proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.