Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
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...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 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" ?
Recording of satisfaction in the assessment order is treated as a jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating penalty for cash receipts in contravention of the statutory banking-route rule; a vague reference to possible penalty proceedings is insufficient, and the defect cannot be cured later in the notice, penalty order or appeal. The Tribunal also held that the alleged contravention must be proved with independent and cogent evidence of the payer, date, amount and statutory threshold breach. Rejected books, estimated income and an uncorroborated admission of additional income were not enough. On that basis, the penalty was held unsustainable and deleted.
Recording of satisfaction in the assessment order is treated as a jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating penalty for cash receipts in contravention of the statutory banking-route rule; a vague reference to possible penalty proceedings is insufficient, and the defect cannot be cured later in the notice, penalty order or appeal. The Tribunal also held that the alleged contravention must be proved with independent and cogent evidence of the payer, date, amount and statutory threshold breach. Rejected books, estimated income and an uncorroborated admission of additional income were not enough. On that basis, the penalty was held unsustainable and deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.