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" ?
A mistaken reference to the wrong tax penalty provision does not, by itself, invalidate proceedings; however, where the order imposes a penalty rate consistent with the wrong provision, the error is substantive rather than clerical. The discrepancy between a 100% penalty under one provision and a 50% penalty under the applicable provision showed that the power had been exercised on the wrong footing, making the order unsustainable. Fresh proceedings may be initiated under the correct provision in accordance with law.
A mistaken reference to the wrong tax penalty provision does not, by itself, invalidate proceedings; however, where the order imposes a penalty rate consistent with the wrong provision, the error is substantive rather than clerical. The discrepancy between a 100% penalty under one provision and a 50% penalty under the applicable provision showed that the power had been exercised on the wrong footing, making the order unsustainable. Fresh proceedings may be initiated under the correct provision in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.