Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore suppl...
Valuation Officer estimates govern property-value additions once statutory valuation is invoked, requiring fresh consideration of objections and compa...
Waiver of written show-cause notice may prevent a later procedural challenge after participation in customs adjudication, preserving statutory appella...
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...
Page of 4912
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 98239 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Address and business-particular discrepancies in transport documents do not by themselves establish deliberate contravention or intent to evade tax. Where goods are accompanied by a tax invoice and e-way bill and no quantity or quality discrepancy exists, technical or procedural defects require independent, reliable evidence of evasion before a penalty may be sustained. Penalty proceedings cannot rest on assumptions or unsubstantiated allegations. In the absence of sufficient evidence of intent to evade tax, the penalty and the appellate order sustaining it were set aside.
Address and business-particular discrepancies in transport documents do not by themselves establish deliberate contravention or intent to evade tax. Where goods are accompanied by a tax invoice and e-way bill and no quantity or quality discrepancy exists, technical or procedural defects require independent, reliable evidence of evasion before a penalty may be sustained. Penalty proceedings cannot rest on assumptions or unsubstantiated allegations. In the absence of sufficient evidence of intent to evade tax, the penalty and the appellate order sustaining it were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4912 
