Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty for cash receipts is attracted only when the receipt falls within one of the three statutory situations under section 269ST: receipt from a person in a day, receipt for a single transaction, or receipt relating to one event or occasion. The note explains that admitted cash sales, or an assessment completed by estimating profit on those sales, are not enough by themselves; the penalty order must record facts showing the specific statutory breach. In the absence of such findings, levy of penalty under section 271DA is unjustified, and the same reasoning applies where the facts and issue are identical across years.
Penalty for cash receipts is attracted only when the receipt falls within one of the three statutory situations under section 269ST: receipt from a person in a day, receipt for a single transaction, or receipt relating to one event or occasion. The note explains that admitted cash sales, or an assessment completed by estimating profit on those sales, are not enough by themselves; the penalty order must record facts showing the specific statutory breach. In the absence of such findings, levy of penalty under section 271DA is unjustified, and the same reasoning applies where the facts and issue are identical across years.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.