Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
HC held that the Assessing Officer (AO) erroneously attempted to add net revenue from sales and purchases, which would result in double taxation. The AO's approach improperly sought to add income already declared by the assessee, despite not rejecting the books of accounts. CIT(A) and ITAT correctly identified that the proposed additions would tax the same income twice. The assessee's declared income already encompassed the revenue in question, and the AO failed to provide substantive evidence warranting additional taxation. Consequently, the court affirmed the lower appellate authorities' decision, ruling in favor of the assessee and preventing improper double taxation of the same income.
HC held that the Assessing Officer (AO) erroneously attempted to add net revenue from sales and purchases, which would result in double taxation. The AO's approach improperly sought to add income already declared by the assessee, despite not rejecting the books of accounts. CIT(A) and ITAT correctly identified that the proposed additions would tax the same income twice. The assessee's declared income already encompassed the revenue in question, and the AO failed to provide substantive evidence warranting additional taxation. Consequently, the court affirmed the lower appellate authorities' decision, ruling in favor of the assessee and preventing improper double taxation of the same income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.