Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2541 to 2560 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT deleted penalty under section 271D where the notice was defective and the alleged contravention did not match the penalty finally imposed: the notice referred to section 271DA read with section 269ST, while the penalty was levied for violation of section 269SS. On merits, the cash receipt formed part of a genuine sale transaction, the Revenue did not dispute that the property deal had materialised, part of the consideration had been paid through banking channels, and the tax consequences were disclosed by the assessee. The Tribunal also noted practical difficulty arising from the purchaser's non-resident status. In these circumstances, the penalty was held unsustainable.
ITAT deleted penalty under section 271D where the notice was defective and the alleged contravention did not match the penalty finally imposed: the notice referred to section 271DA read with section 269ST, while the penalty was levied for violation of section 269SS. On merits, the cash receipt formed part of a genuine sale transaction, the Revenue did not dispute that the property deal had materialised, part of the consideration had been paid through banking channels, and the tax consequences were disclosed by the assessee. The Tribunal also noted practical difficulty arising from the purchaser's non-resident status. In these circumstances, the penalty was held unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
