Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that DRI officers are competent to issue show-cause notices under Section 75 read with the relevant rules in drawback matters - the appellant's challenge to DRI jurisdiction was rejected. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant CHA/CB under Sections 114 and 117 was set aside: the allegations related to CHALR-regulated dereliction of CHA duties and did not establish abetment, collusion or wrongful involvement warranting statutory penal provisions; disciplinary remedies under CHALR prevail. Consequential orders imposing monetary penalty under Sections 114/117 were quashed and the appeal disposed of.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that DRI officers are competent to issue show-cause notices under Section 75 read with the relevant rules in drawback matters - the appellant's challenge to DRI jurisdiction was rejected. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant CHA/CB under Sections 114 and 117 was set aside: the allegations related to CHALR-regulated dereliction of CHA duties and did not establish abetment, collusion or wrongful involvement warranting statutory penal provisions; disciplinary remedies under CHALR prevail. Consequential orders imposing monetary penalty under Sections 114/117 were quashed and the appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
