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 allowed the appeal regarding seizure of six gold bars weighing 499.17 grams from appellant's possession at Guwahati Railway Station. The tribunal held that 99.5% purity alone cannot establish foreign origin without corroborative evidence. Since this was a town seizure, Section 123 presumption was inapplicable, placing burden on department to prove smuggling. Department failed to establish foreign origin or smuggled nature with evidence. Appellant provided documentary proof of domestic purchase from M/s. Nirmala Trading Company and demonstrated internal transfer between business units. Minor variations in employee statements could not override documentary evidence of licit purchase. Confiscation order and penalty of Rs.1,60,000 under Section 112(b)(i) of Customs Act, 1962 were set aside due to established domestic purchase.
CESTAT allowed the appeal regarding seizure of six gold bars weighing 499.17 grams from appellant's possession at Guwahati Railway Station. The tribunal held that 99.5% purity alone cannot establish foreign origin without corroborative evidence. Since this was a town seizure, Section 123 presumption was inapplicable, placing burden on department to prove smuggling. Department failed to establish foreign origin or smuggled nature with evidence. Appellant provided documentary proof of domestic purchase from M/s. Nirmala Trading Company and demonstrated internal transfer between business units. Minor variations in employee statements could not override documentary evidence of licit purchase. Confiscation order and penalty of Rs.1,60,000 under Section 112(b)(i) of Customs Act, 1962 were set aside due to established domestic purchase.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
