Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not survive once the underlying quantum addition, which formed the sole basis of the penalty, had already been deleted in the assessee's own case and that fact was not disputed by the Revenue. The Tribunal treated the penalty as purely consequential to the assessment addition and held that, without a surviving addition, there was no basis to sustain the penalty. The order sustaining the penalty was set aside and the penalty deleted.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) could not survive once the underlying quantum addition, which formed the sole basis of the penalty, had already been deleted in the assessee's own case and that fact was not disputed by the Revenue. The Tribunal treated the penalty as purely consequential to the assessment addition and held that, without a surviving addition, there was no basis to sustain the penalty. The order sustaining the penalty was set aside and the penalty deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.