Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
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.