Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Penalty under section 271AAB was contested on the ground that the search team failed to examine or ascertain the source of cash and jewellery and did not inform searched persons of the disclosure obligation under section 132(4); the failure of authorised officers to question and elicit disclosures was held determinative of the penalty rate, leading to the conclusion that the lesser statutory penalty rate should apply. The assessing officer was directed to recompute the penalty at the lower rate and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Penalty under section 271AAB was contested on the ground that the search team failed to examine or ascertain the source of cash and jewellery and did not inform searched persons of the disclosure obligation under section 132(4); the failure of authorised officers to question and elicit disclosures was held determinative of the penalty rate, leading to the conclusion that the lesser statutory penalty rate should apply. The assessing officer was directed to recompute the penalty at the lower rate and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.