Contractual indemnity does not bar criminal prosecution where allegations disclose cognizable offences rather than a mere civil breach. Claims that an agent introduced non-existent suppliers, produced documents to establish their genuineness, and facilitated fabricated GST invoices and supporting records for wrongful input-tax-credit claims may indicate dishonest intent from the inception of the transactions. Such disputed allegations require determination in criminal proceedings and cannot be conclusively resolved through inherent-jurisdiction proceedings to quash an FIR. The criminal proceedings were permitted to continue without any determination on the merits.

Rule 89 permits an SEZ unit exporting zero-rated services on payment of integrated tax to claim refund where it used input tax credit proportionately distributed through an Input Service Distributor. The supplier-only refund restriction in the proviso to Rule 89(1) applies to direct supplies of goods or services to an SEZ unit, preventing duplicate supplier and recipient claims. It does not apply where corporate-level input services are distributed as credit and no supplier can seek the refund. The declaration under Rule 89(2)(f) likewise applies only to direct, tax-collected supplies to an SEZ unit; its absence does not bar such a refund claim. Refund rejections were set aside for processing.

Vague show-cause notices alleging ineligible input tax credit without identifying invoices, the nature of ineligibility, or the basis for rejection cannot support denial of an inverted-duty refund. Invoice details supplied by the taxpayer do not cure that defect, and an appellate authority cannot introduce a distinct ground not stated in the notice, as doing so breaches natural justice. Eligibility of unutilised input tax credit must be determined through proceedings for wrongful availment or utilisation before the credit can be disallowed. Refund proceedings cannot be used collaterally to decide credit eligibility; absent a prior determination, refund denial on that basis is unsustainable.

Departmental appeals in interest-only GST disputes must be assessed against the disputed interest amount under the applicable monetary-limit circular. Where the interest in dispute is below the prescribed threshold for appeals before GSTAT and no specified exclusion applies, the departmental appeal is not maintainable and must be dismissed. The monetary threshold applies specifically to the interest component in an interest-only dispute rather than to any broader tax amount.

Section 107(11) of the CGST Act permits an appellate authority to conduct or cause further inquiry and then confirm, modify or annul the order under appeal; it does not permit remand to the adjudicating authority. The appellate authority must independently verify relevant documents and figures and issue a reasoned final order identifying the points for determination, its decision and reasons. A direction requiring the adjudicating authority to re-examine evidence and delete or confirm a tax demand exceeds appellate jurisdiction. The appeal must instead be decided afresh by the appellate authority after necessary verification and observance of natural justice.

Section 107(11) of the CGST Act permits the appellate authority to conduct further inquiry and then confirm, modify or annul the appealed order, but bars it from remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority. Verification of documents and figures supporting a GST demand must therefore be undertaken by the appellate authority itself, including by calling for records where necessary. Section 107(12) requires a reasoned appellate order identifying the points for determination, the decision and the supporting reasons. A direction requiring the original authority to verify evidence and delete an untenable demand constitutes an impermissible remand and gives that authority a second opportunity. The appeal must be decided afresh after independent verification and observance of natural justice.

Departmental appeal limitation after recall from the call book is determined by the original filing date; administrative renumbering does not create a fresh appeal or make it time-barred. For special additional duty refund on imported plastic granules, generic sale-invoice descriptions did not negate correlation where Bills of Entry, sale invoices, reconciliation, VAT/CST payment records and a Chartered Accountant's certificate supported the claim. Sales through consignment agents did not independently justify rejection absent a specific documentary defect. Wikipedia material could not displace contemporaneous import and sale records. The refund sanction was restored, while the departmental appeal failed on merits.

Statutorily capped LIG and MIG apartment prices, which permitted only direct-cost recovery and excluded overheads, administrative expenses and indirect taxes, did not give rise to profiteering; the analysis was confined to commercially priced HIG units. Eligible HIG purchasers were entitled individually to commensurate additional input-tax-credit benefits, without cross-adjusting excess passed to one purchaser against another purchaser's shortfall. Post-occupancy-certificate sales and unsold units were excluded from taxable-supply computation. Unpassed benefit attracted 18% compensatory interest from collection until refund. A continuing contravention after the penalty provision commenced attracted 10% penalty, subject to statutory waiver on payment within 30 days.

Discretion to condone delay in filing a revised return may be exercised where revisions to tax-reporting information result in the same interest income being taxed in two assessment years. Genuine hardship must be assessed from the surrounding facts rather than a fixed formula. Double taxation, prompt pursuit of rectification remedies and absence of taxpayer inaction supported relief, while refusal would result in unjust enrichment. Permission to file the revised return was granted, subject to verification of the relevant facts and an appropriate decision in accordance with law.

Income-tax prosecution for false verification or wilful non-production of accounts cannot continue where a merits-based appellate remand removes the factual foundation of concealment, falsity or wilful default underlying the original assessment. Complaints founded on that original assessment are consequently unsustainable and liable to be quashed. Directors may be prosecuted under a vicarious-liability provision only when the company is arraigned as an accused. A complaint against the company and directors may be maintainable where their respective roles are alleged, but separate complaints against directors alone for the company's offence are unsustainable and liable to be quashed.

Transfer-pricing comparability must meet statutory requirements; taxpayer-selected comparables cannot be replaced merely with a standard departmental set. Functional dissimilarity, abnormal margins, turnover, contractual risk profile and related-party transactions may justify exclusion, with a lower related-party threshold preferred where adequate uncontrolled comparables exist. Foreign-exchange gains or losses are operating items only when directly linked to the relevant international transaction. Reliable subsequently available data may support appellate-stage comparable changes, subject to statutory conditions. The prescribed variation is a tolerance range, not a standard deduction. Working-capital adjustment addresses material margin di.....

Recovery of an outstanding demand may be restrained while a statutory appeal remains pending, alongside directions for prompt appellate disposal. The appellate authority is required to decide the appeal within the stipulated period by a speaking and reasoned order after giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing. Interim protection against recovery continues until final disposal of the appeal, preserving the taxpayer's position pending the appellate decision.

Consideration received for assigning rights, claims and entitlements connected with disputed partnership property and litigation is capital in character where it represents either an enforceable beneficial or proprietary interest or merely a litigative right or right to sue. Complete divestment of the underlying source does not become revenue income merely because capital gains tax may not apply; the residuary income head applies only to receipts that are first income. The addition as income from other sources was therefore deleted. Expenditure claimed against interest income remains deductible only when proved to have been incurred wholly and exclusively to earn that income. As no direct and proximate nexus was established, the disallowance was sustained.

Regional support-service consideration falls outside royalty treatment under the India-Singapore DTAA and domestic law where the provider merely applies its own expertise and does not transfer a right to use industrial, commercial or scientific experience or impart deployable knowledge. It also does not constitute fees for technical services unless technical knowledge, experience, skill, know-how or processes are made available so the recipient can apply them independently. Continued reliance on the provider indicates that this condition is unmet. Such receipts are business profits and are not taxable in India absent a permanent establishment. TDS credit remains subject to factual verification and grant according to law.

Excess business stock comprising regularly traded commodities, found at business premises and explained as arising from suppressed business profits, retains the character of undisclosed business income where no material establishes an extraneous source. Mere non-recording of purchases does not justify treating the stock as unexplained investment. The higher tax rate for deemed income applies only after valid invocation of the relevant deeming provision; consequently, the excess stock is taxable under normal provisions. Interest for delayed return filing remains mandatory but must be computed from the statutory due date, actual filing date and verified period of default, after credit for interest already charged or paid.

Genuineness of dematerialised equity-share transactions supporting a long-term capital-gains claim depends on documentary evidence, banking-channel payments and identifiable transaction records. Where taxpayers produce such evidence, an allegation that share-sale proceeds constitute unexplained cash credit requires specific defects or rebuttal of the material. An alleged commission expenditure linked solely to the asserted bogus share-sale proceeds is consequential and cannot independently sustain disallowance where the underlying allegation fails.

Transfer-pricing treatment of corporate guarantees and interest on convertible loans followed consistent prior-year treatment where no factual difference was shown. Payments to non-residents, product, trademark and patent registration expenses, in-house research and development deductions, vehicle depreciation, and partner remuneration were also addressed through established prior-year positions. Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is computed only by reference to investments yielding exempt income; foreign investments generating taxable dividends require exclusion, subject to verification. Foreign-currency royalty receipts already recorded and offered to tax cannot be treated as undisclosed income without supporting material. Employee contributions already disallowed by the taxpayer cannot be disallowed again.

Characterisation of losses on transfer of real-estate allotment rights depends on their actual treatment and supporting evidence, not book entries alone. Where the rights were recorded as short-term loans and advances rather than closing stock, and the claimed business loss was not substantiated, they were treated as capital assets. The resulting loss remained eligible for indexation and carry-forward as long-term capital loss. Where interest is claimed as part of acquisition cost, conflicting positions require fresh computation after the taxpayer is given an opportunity to provide supporting evidence.

Section 56(2)(viib) applies when consideration is received for the issue of shares. Fully and compulsorily convertible debentures retain their character as debentures until conversion; compulsory future conversion does not treat them as shares on the date consideration is received. Neither section 56(2)(viib) nor Rule 11UA creates a deeming rule that classifies unconverted FCCDs as shares. The original issue of convertible debentures and the later issue of shares on conversion are distinct events, and conversion without fresh consideration does not independently trigger the provision. Regulatory or insolvency classifications cannot expand the charging language of the Income-tax Act.

Chapter X confines transfer-pricing adjustments to income from international transactions with associated enterprises and does not permit entity-level enhancement of profits from unrelated-party dealings. Under TNMM, operating margins must reflect appropriate treatment of non-operating marketing and promotional expenses, warranty provisions and bad debts, while business liability write-backs and export incentives linked to export sales are operating income; other operating income must not be excluded twice. Comparable selection for Air Handling Unit manufacturers depends on functional similarity, retaining industrial HVAC and refrigeration manufacturers but excluding final consumer, commercial refrigeration, or mobility-product businesses. .....