Retrospective invalidity of ocean-freight IGST supports refunds despite non-party status and prior credit utilisation, subject to authorised appeal gr...
Additional evidence in departmental appeals may include show-cause-notice material without introducing a new case where it merely corroborates existin...
Reasoned rectification orders require consideration of expenditure disclosed in income-tax returns, preventing revision based on incomplete income com...
Modified returns after business reorganisations cannot trigger fresh scrutiny once the original assessment was complete, invalidating related transfer...
Third-party loose sheets require reliable nexus before supporting unexplained expenditure additions; presumptions do not establish payer identity or o...
TNMM comparability using audited accounts and working-capital adjustments can eliminate unwarranted transfer-pricing additions where verified margins ...
Gross-profit additions on disputed purchases require reasoned appellate determination; disclosed claims alone do not support inaccurate-particulars pe...
Limitation after transfer-pricing remand: fresh TPO reference did not extend the assessment deadline, rendering the consequential assessment time-barr...
Page of 4913
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 98250 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reliance on a previously quashed departmental circular could not sustain rejection of an inverted-duty refund claim for cotton-yarn clearances. High Court quashed the appellate order because it rested on that circular and required fresh examination of the inputs procured and their use in manufacturing and clearing cotton yarn before refund eligibility could be determined. The refund claims were remitted for fresh examination, with refund to be granted if eligibility is established.
Reliance on a previously quashed departmental circular could not sustain rejection of an inverted-duty refund claim for cotton-yarn clearances. High Court quashed the appellate order because it rested on that circular and required fresh examination of the inputs procured and their use in manufacturing and clearing cotton yarn before refund eligibility could be determined. The refund claims were remitted for fresh examination, with refund to be granted if eligibility is established.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4913 
