Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2021 to 2040 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty under section 271AAB remained leviable on undisclosed cash found during search because the disclosure was made only after seizure and admission under section 132(4), so the assessee could not escape penalty merely because the returned income later matched the finally assessed income after quantum relief. The Tribunal held that clause (a) was inapplicable because the assessee did not specify or substantiate the manner of deriving the income, clause (b) was inapplicable because the income had in fact been admitted, and the case therefore fell under clause (c). As no extraordinary circumstances justified the maximum rate, the penalty under clause (c) was restricted to 30% of the undisclosed income.
Penalty under section 271AAB remained leviable on undisclosed cash found during search because the disclosure was made only after seizure and admission under section 132(4), so the assessee could not escape penalty merely because the returned income later matched the finally assessed income after quantum relief. The Tribunal held that clause (a) was inapplicable because the assessee did not specify or substantiate the manner of deriving the income, clause (b) was inapplicable because the income had in fact been admitted, and the case therefore fell under clause (c). As no extraordinary circumstances justified the maximum rate, the penalty under clause (c) was restricted to 30% of the undisclosed income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.