Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
The HC held that reversal of input tax credit during an ongoing inspection, in the presence of officers, supported the finding that the declaration under Section 74(5) was not voluntary; the subsequent payment of interest and penalty and request for closure were treated as consequential. It noted that a bare allegation of coercion needs supporting circumstances, but on these facts the inspection context made the involuntariness credible, so that finding was sustained. As the closure under Sections 74(5) and 74(6) was invalid, the proceedings were restored to the pre-closure stage, with liberty to proceed under Sections 73 or 74 and exclusion of the intervening period from limitation.
The HC held that reversal of input tax credit during an ongoing inspection, in the presence of officers, supported the finding that the declaration under Section 74(5) was not voluntary; the subsequent payment of interest and penalty and request for closure were treated as consequential. It noted that a bare allegation of coercion needs supporting circumstances, but on these facts the inspection context made the involuntariness credible, so that finding was sustained. As the closure under Sections 74(5) and 74(6) was invalid, the proceedings were restored to the pre-closure stage, with liberty to proceed under Sections 73 or 74 and exclusion of the intervening period from limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.