Mobile-phone electronic evidence failed to establish customs undervaluation, while duty survived on non-authentic origin certificates without importer...
Automotive radio classification treats integrated infotainment features as supplementary, placing complete and qualifying unassembled units under the ...
Separate corporate personality prevents directors from being personally liable for company deposits without a guarantee or independent legal undertaki...
Cross-segment derivatives manipulation: integrated order patterns can support interim restraints, while director liability requires responsibility, co...
Power bank definition limits the customs-duty exclusion, preserving concessional treatment for stationary, grid-scale and industrial battery storage s...
Post-detection surrender of depreciation and amortisation claims arising from dealings with a non-genuine supplier was treated as non-voluntary where survey findings and adverse material had exposed accommodation entries, the original return claimed the expenditure, and no revised return correctly disclosed income. Failure to prove the supplier's existence supported misreporting through suppression of facts and false entries; a surrender to buy peace or avoid litigation after detection did not preclude penalty for under-reported income. A challenge that the penalty notice omitted the specific misreporting clause was rejected because it had not been raised before the assessing or appellate authorities or through grounds before the Tribunal. The penalty was sustained and the appeal dismissed.
Post-detection surrender of depreciation and amortisation claims arising from dealings with a non-genuine supplier was treated as non-voluntary where survey findings and adverse material had exposed accommodation entries, the original return claimed the expenditure, and no revised return correctly disclosed income. Failure to prove the supplier's existence supported misreporting through suppression of facts and false entries; a surrender to buy peace or avoid litigation after detection did not preclude penalty for under-reported income. A challenge that the penalty notice omitted the specific misreporting clause was rejected because it had not been raised before the assessing or appellate authorities or through grounds before the Tribunal. The penalty was sustained and the appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.