Habeas corpus challenge to arrest safeguards remains maintainable, but substantial compliance with reasons-to-believe requirement defeats the petition...
Employee travel, hospitality, conveyance, tickets, goods, and hotel boarding expenses were held to fall within the statutory heads of fringe benefits under section 115WB(1)(b) read with section 115WB(2), so the Tribunal upheld the quantum assessment on those items. The Commissioner (Appeals) was also found to have issued only a limited consequential direction to verify tax already paid and finalise computation, not an impermissible fresh remand on merits. On penalty, the Tribunal sustained cancellation under section 271(1)(d), holding that rejection of the assessee's exclusion claim in quantum proceedings did not by itself establish inaccurate particulars, following Reliance Petroproducts.
Employee travel, hospitality, conveyance, tickets, goods, and hotel boarding expenses were held to fall within the statutory heads of fringe benefits under section 115WB(1)(b) read with section 115WB(2), so the Tribunal upheld the quantum assessment on those items. The Commissioner (Appeals) was also found to have issued only a limited consequential direction to verify tax already paid and finalise computation, not an impermissible fresh remand on merits. On penalty, the Tribunal sustained cancellation under section 271(1)(d), holding that rejection of the assessee's exclusion claim in quantum proceedings did not by itself establish inaccurate particulars, following Reliance Petroproducts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
