Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
Disallowance of carting expenses based on a presumed double claim was unsustainable where the assessee showed that transportation charges were raised separately by cement suppliers through debit notes or invoices, distinct from purchase invoices, and supported this with sample bills, vouchers and accounting records. The Tribunal held that the assessee's detailed explanation and documentary evidence had not been examined in either the assessment or appellate order, so the disallowance rested only on presumption and was vitiated. The addition was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Disallowance of carting expenses based on a presumed double claim was unsustainable where the assessee showed that transportation charges were raised separately by cement suppliers through debit notes or invoices, distinct from purchase invoices, and supported this with sample bills, vouchers and accounting records. The Tribunal held that the assessee's detailed explanation and documentary evidence had not been examined in either the assessment or appellate order, so the disallowance rested only on presumption and was vitiated. The addition was deleted and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
