Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Contravention of the NRNR account regulations attracted penalty against both the authorised dealer and the account holders, because the scheme required the account to be opened only by a non-resident person from funds remitted from outside India, and Section 13(1) of FEMA applied to any person who contravened the Act or regulations. The later omission of Regulation 5(1)(iv) did not extinguish liabilities already incurred, since repeal by omission does not erase prior violations absent contrary intent, so the challenge to the show cause notices failed. Confiscation, however, was set aside because the adjudicating authority and tribunal gave no reasons for ordering it, despite the discretionary nature of Section 13(2) and the repayment of the loan through maturity proceeds.
Contravention of the NRNR account regulations attracted penalty against both the authorised dealer and the account holders, because the scheme required the account to be opened only by a non-resident person from funds remitted from outside India, and Section 13(1) of FEMA applied to any person who contravened the Act or regulations. The later omission of Regulation 5(1)(iv) did not extinguish liabilities already incurred, since repeal by omission does not erase prior violations absent contrary intent, so the challenge to the show cause notices failed. Confiscation, however, was set aside because the adjudicating authority and tribunal gave no reasons for ordering it, despite the discretionary nature of Section 13(2) and the repayment of the loan through maturity proceeds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
