Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were held inadmissible because the department did not examine the makers as witnesses, failing the mandatory conditions of s.138B(1)(b); consequently, adjudication and penalty proceedings could not be sustained on such statements, and denial of cross-examination violated the "reasonable opportunity" under s.122A. The contention that absence of s.108 statements bars noticees from objecting was rejected as the statute creates no adverse inference for non-recording; the issue was answered against the revenue. Other framed questions were rendered unnecessary, and the appeals were dismissed. - HC
Statements recorded under s.108 of the Customs Act were held inadmissible because the department did not examine the makers as witnesses, failing the mandatory conditions of s.138B(1)(b); consequently, adjudication and penalty proceedings could not be sustained on such statements, and denial of cross-examination violated the "reasonable opportunity" under s.122A. The contention that absence of s.108 statements bars noticees from objecting was rejected as the statute creates no adverse inference for non-recording; the issue was answered against the revenue. Other framed questions were rendered unnecessary, and the appeals were dismissed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.