Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the underlying quantum addition for alleged bogus purchases represented only an estimated profit element and not a definite, proved concealment. The ITAT deleted the penalty for Assessment Year 2010-2011 on the ground that estimated additions alone do not justify penalty. For Assessment Year 2011-2012, the appellate order sustaining penalty was set aside because the assessee's submissions had not been considered; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity and addressing the material placed on record.
Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was held unsustainable where the underlying quantum addition for alleged bogus purchases represented only an estimated profit element and not a definite, proved concealment. The ITAT deleted the penalty for Assessment Year 2010-2011 on the ground that estimated additions alone do not justify penalty. For Assessment Year 2011-2012, the appellate order sustaining penalty was set aside because the assessee's submissions had not been considered; the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity and addressing the material placed on record.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
