Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC held that absence of endorsement on the bills of lading did not automatically vitiate the sale contracts, as the parties were ad idem and no repudiation was pleaded; however, on the evidence the transactions were not proved to have been completed on the high seas because there was no proof of delivery of endorsed bills to the buyers offshore. Consequently the HC set aside the interim order in favour of the petitioner and clarified that the petitioner is liable to pay the market fee and penalty in respect of 9,000 metric tonnes of wheat as directed earlier; the writ petition is disposed of.
The HC held that absence of endorsement on the bills of lading did not automatically vitiate the sale contracts, as the parties were ad idem and no repudiation was pleaded; however, on the evidence the transactions were not proved to have been completed on the high seas because there was no proof of delivery of endorsed bills to the buyers offshore. Consequently the HC set aside the interim order in favour of the petitioner and clarified that the petitioner is liable to pay the market fee and penalty in respect of 9,000 metric tonnes of wheat as directed earlier; the writ petition is disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
