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...
Whether mere deviation of route during transit, when the consignment was accompanied by valid tax invoice and no discrepancy in goods or documents was found, could justify detention and penalty under s.129 CGST/KGST was answered in the negative. The authority relied only on a cyclostyled driver statement and produced no material to prove deliberate diversion or intent to evade tax, while the taxpayer offered a prompt, plausible explanation of inadvertent route-miss. Since s.129 is invocable only upon deliberate tax evasion and not for technical or minor lapses, the orders imposing s.129 penalty were held illegal and were set aside, with liberty to proceed, if at all, only under s.125. - HC
Whether mere deviation of route during transit, when the consignment was accompanied by valid tax invoice and no discrepancy in goods or documents was found, could justify detention and penalty under s.129 CGST/KGST was answered in the negative. The authority relied only on a cyclostyled driver statement and produced no material to prove deliberate diversion or intent to evade tax, while the taxpayer offered a prompt, plausible explanation of inadvertent route-miss. Since s.129 is invocable only upon deliberate tax evasion and not for technical or minor lapses, the orders imposing s.129 penalty were held illegal and were set aside, with liberty to proceed, if at all, only under s.125. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.