Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AT affirmed findings that extensive multi-statute investigations, including DRI seizures and electronic material, established contraventions of Section 3(b) of FEMA by the principal operative and the corporate appellant for hawala-based under-valuation of imports; retracted statements were rejected and electronic records admitted under FEMA s.39. Penalties were mitigated: individual liable reduced to Rs.2,000,000 (pre-deposit adjusted) and corporate appellant to Rs.1,500,000. Two director appellants were exonerated and held not liable under Section 42 of FEMA. Appeals by the principal and the corporate appellant were partly allowed; appeals by the two directors were allowed in full. Pending applications disposed of accordingly.
The AT affirmed findings that extensive multi-statute investigations, including DRI seizures and electronic material, established contraventions of Section 3(b) of FEMA by the principal operative and the corporate appellant for hawala-based under-valuation of imports; retracted statements were rejected and electronic records admitted under FEMA s.39. Penalties were mitigated: individual liable reduced to Rs.2,000,000 (pre-deposit adjusted) and corporate appellant to Rs.1,500,000. Two director appellants were exonerated and held not liable under Section 42 of FEMA. Appeals by the principal and the corporate appellant were partly allowed; appeals by the two directors were allowed in full. Pending applications disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
