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 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95673 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 misreporting of income under section 270A could not be sustained where the assessee had disclosed the interest income and the dispute concerned only eligibility for deduction under section 80P(2)(d). The Tribunal held that penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, and an addition or disallowance by itself does not establish misreporting; the Assessing Officer must show that the case falls within a specific statutory category. The assessee's explanation that incorrect PAN status caused a technical difficulty was found bona fide, and there was no material of false particulars or suppression. The penalty also failed because the notice mentioned only under-reporting, while the final levy was for under-reporting due to misreporting without specifying the relevant charge.
Penalty for misreporting of income under section 270A could not be sustained where the assessee had disclosed the interest income and the dispute concerned only eligibility for deduction under section 80P(2)(d). The Tribunal held that penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment proceedings, and an addition or disallowance by itself does not establish misreporting; the Assessing Officer must show that the case falls within a specific statutory category. The assessee's explanation that incorrect PAN status caused a technical difficulty was found bona fide, and there was no material of false particulars or suppression. The penalty also failed because the notice mentioned only under-reporting, while the final levy was for under-reporting due to misreporting without specifying the relevant charge.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.