Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Forensic extraction from a director's mobile phone was treated as admissible without a separate section 138C certificate because the phone was recovered under panchnama and examined in context with the surrounding record. Rule 12 permitted rejection of declared transaction value where reasonable doubt arose from the director's statement and parallel invoices showing higher values, so re-determination of assessable value was upheld. Misdeclaration of value attracted confiscation under section 111(m), and the same undisclosed invoices justified invocation of the extended period under section 28(4). Differential duty and equal penalty under section 114A were sustained, but separate penalties under section 114AA were set aside.
Forensic extraction from a director's mobile phone was treated as admissible without a separate section 138C certificate because the phone was recovered under panchnama and examined in context with the surrounding record. Rule 12 permitted rejection of declared transaction value where reasonable doubt arose from the director's statement and parallel invoices showing higher values, so re-determination of assessable value was upheld. Misdeclaration of value attracted confiscation under section 111(m), and the same undisclosed invoices justified invocation of the extended period under section 28(4). Differential duty and equal penalty under section 114A were sustained, but separate penalties under section 114AA were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
