Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
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...
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the finding that the appellant contravened Section 3(a) of FEMA in relation to unauthorised foreign exchange dealing, relying on corroborative statements, recovery of US $ 10,000 from the appellant's personal custody, and the absence of a credible explanation for possession of the currency. The plea based on educational background was rejected because the persons involved had prior money-changing experience and were expected to know the legal requirements. Liability for penalty was therefore sustained, but the Tribunal reduced the quantum of penalty in view of the facts and circumstances and directed adjustment of the pre-deposit against the reduced amount.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the finding that the appellant contravened Section 3(a) of FEMA in relation to unauthorised foreign exchange dealing, relying on corroborative statements, recovery of US $ 10,000 from the appellant's personal custody, and the absence of a credible explanation for possession of the currency. The plea based on educational background was rejected because the persons involved had prior money-changing experience and were expected to know the legal requirements. Liability for penalty was therefore sustained, but the Tribunal reduced the quantum of penalty in view of the facts and circumstances and directed adjustment of the pre-deposit against the reduced amount.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
