Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The SC dismissed the Revenue's Special Leave Petition challenging the reopening of assessment under section 133A based on a survey of a bank. The petitioner's transactions with the bank involved inward and outward remittances, with discrepancies arising from the bank's use of both notional and actual realized exchange rates. The HC found that the petitioner had furnished all relevant material during the regular assessment, including bank statements reflecting actual realized rates, negating any prima facie belief of income escapement. The SC noted an unexplained inordinate delay of 198 days in filing and 79 days in refiling the SLP. On both procedural delay and substantive grounds, the SC upheld the High Court's order, concluding there was no justification to interfere with the assessment reopening. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
The SC dismissed the Revenue's Special Leave Petition challenging the reopening of assessment under section 133A based on a survey of a bank. The petitioner's transactions with the bank involved inward and outward remittances, with discrepancies arising from the bank's use of both notional and actual realized exchange rates. The HC found that the petitioner had furnished all relevant material during the regular assessment, including bank statements reflecting actual realized rates, negating any prima facie belief of income escapement. The SC noted an unexplained inordinate delay of 198 days in filing and 79 days in refiling the SLP. On both procedural delay and substantive grounds, the SC upheld the High Court's order, concluding there was no justification to interfere with the assessment reopening. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.