Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
The HC allowed the appeal in part: it affirmed the CESTAT's decision to set aside revocation of the authorised courier's registration as disproportionate given acceptance and release of the goods, but set aside the CESTAT's reduction of penalties. The HC held penalties under Regulation 14 and s.117 operate independently and restored the original penalty(s) of Rs.50,000 as imposed by Revenue, finding the CESTAT erred in reducing and/or setting aside those penalties despite upholding non-revocation. Consequently, the revocation remains quashed, but the respondent (authorised courier) must pay the restored penalties.
The HC allowed the appeal in part: it affirmed the CESTAT's decision to set aside revocation of the authorised courier's registration as disproportionate given acceptance and release of the goods, but set aside the CESTAT's reduction of penalties. The HC held penalties under Regulation 14 and s.117 operate independently and restored the original penalty(s) of Rs.50,000 as imposed by Revenue, finding the CESTAT erred in reducing and/or setting aside those penalties despite upholding non-revocation. Consequently, the revocation remains quashed, but the respondent (authorised courier) must pay the restored penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
