Erroneous Grant of immunity by Settlement Commission from Penalty and Prosecution under section 245H(1) of the IT Act 1961 - order of Delhi High Court dated 10.02.2014 in W.1\(C)5262/2013 in the case of CIT(C-II), versus ITSC & Another.
📋
Contents
Cases Cited
Referred In
Notifications
Circulars
Forms
Manuals
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Case Laws New
Ref Provisions New
Plus +
Source NTF
Summary
Similar
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Immunity from penalty and prosecution requires true and full disclosure at the time of application, not later piecemeal disclosures. Immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 245H(1) may be granted only after satisfaction of statutory conditions; when independent evidence shows substantially more concealed income than disclosed in the original application, later piecemeal disclosures made during proceedings do not qualify as true and full disclosure and immunity should not be granted.
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Immunity from penalty and prosecution requires true and full disclosure at the time of application, not later piecemeal disclosures.
Immunity from penalty and prosecution under Section 245H(1) may be granted only after satisfaction of statutory conditions; when independent evidence shows substantially more concealed income than disclosed in the original application, later piecemeal disclosures made during proceedings do not qualify as true and full disclosure and immunity should not be granted.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.