Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
A partner and partnership firm were considered for separate penalties arising from the same import contravention. The Tribunal held that, in the absence of any statutory indication treating the firm as distinct from its partners for this penalty, the penalty on the firm covered the partners' contravention as well; the separate penalty on the partner under Section 112(a) was therefore set aside. For use of false or incorrect declaration documents under Section 114AA, the partner's unwithdrawn statement admitting participation in arranging the import in the firm's name was treated as sufficient evidence, so penalty was upheld in principle, but reduced as excessive and disproportionate.
A partner and partnership firm were considered for separate penalties arising from the same import contravention. The Tribunal held that, in the absence of any statutory indication treating the firm as distinct from its partners for this penalty, the penalty on the firm covered the partners' contravention as well; the separate penalty on the partner under Section 112(a) was therefore set aside. For use of false or incorrect declaration documents under Section 114AA, the partner's unwithdrawn statement admitting participation in arranging the import in the firm's name was treated as sufficient evidence, so penalty was upheld in principle, but reduced as excessive and disproportionate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
