Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 31 January 2025 and allowed the petition by way of remand. The court addressed an appeal concerning invocation of the extended period of limitation and prior reversal of input tax credit appropriation, noting the Revenue's failure to produce documentary proof of foreign exchange realization such as BRCs or FIRCs. The HC held that FIRCs need not correspond transaction-by-transaction and may be maintained on a periodic basis, provided the aggregate foreign exchange remitted fully substantiates the claimed benefit. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with this principle and applicable law, with liberty to both parties to lead relevant evidence.
The HC set aside the impugned order dated 31 January 2025 and allowed the petition by way of remand. The court addressed an appeal concerning invocation of the extended period of limitation and prior reversal of input tax credit appropriation, noting the Revenue's failure to produce documentary proof of foreign exchange realization such as BRCs or FIRCs. The HC held that FIRCs need not correspond transaction-by-transaction and may be maintained on a periodic basis, provided the aggregate foreign exchange remitted fully substantiates the claimed benefit. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with this principle and applicable law, with liberty to both parties to lead relevant evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.