Belated Form 10B filing during Covid-19 cannot defeat charitable exemption where genuine hardship warrants condonation and substantial justice prevail...
Limitation for consequential assessments runs from prescribed authority receipt, while verified purchases cannot be disallowed merely for unanswered s...
Higher depreciation for qualifying commercial vehicles, exempt-income disallowance, research deduction verification, and club-expense treatment clarif...
Charitable registration renewal cannot become an assessment of receipts, profitability or annual exemption compliance, requiring renewal and donation ...
AMP expenditure for own business is not an international transaction without an associated-enterprise arrangement, eliminating transfer pricing adjust...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Service of notice and a subsequent order under the Act were treated as sufficient to set criminal proceedings in motion for wilful failure to deposit tax deducted at source under Section 276B. The High Court held that due service had been established, and the applicants could not resist prosecution by claiming ignorance when continued non-compliance after notice disclosed a prima facie case of wilful default. The objection of non-service was treated as a disputed factual issue for trial, not a ground for quashing in inherent jurisdiction. The fact that the offence was compoundable did not justify termination of the prosecution absent settlement. The applications for quashing were dismissed.
Service of notice and a subsequent order under the Act were treated as sufficient to set criminal proceedings in motion for wilful failure to deposit tax deducted at source under Section 276B. The High Court held that due service had been established, and the applicants could not resist prosecution by claiming ignorance when continued non-compliance after notice disclosed a prima facie case of wilful default. The objection of non-service was treated as a disputed factual issue for trial, not a ground for quashing in inherent jurisdiction. The fact that the offence was compoundable did not justify termination of the prosecution absent settlement. The applications for quashing were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.