Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Section 4A of the 1957 AP Sales Tax Act was treated as empowering a superior officer to exercise assessment powers without a separate jurisdictional order, so the Deputy Commissioner's assessment was upheld. The extended limitation under section 14(3) applied because the dealer produced accounts and related material after inspection, making the assessment timely. The dealer failed to discharge the section 6A burden to prove stock transfer or agency movement in the prescribed manner, so the transactions were treated as inter-State sales and the natural justice objection based on denial of cross-examination failed. Claims of double turnover addition and sales return deductions were rejected for want of proof, and penalty under the CST regime was sustained through the State penalty provision.
Section 4A of the 1957 AP Sales Tax Act was treated as empowering a superior officer to exercise assessment powers without a separate jurisdictional order, so the Deputy Commissioner's assessment was upheld. The extended limitation under section 14(3) applied because the dealer produced accounts and related material after inspection, making the assessment timely. The dealer failed to discharge the section 6A burden to prove stock transfer or agency movement in the prescribed manner, so the transactions were treated as inter-State sales and the natural justice objection based on denial of cross-examination failed. Claims of double turnover addition and sales return deductions were rejected for want of proof, and penalty under the CST regime was sustained through the State penalty provision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.