Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Under the Black Money Act, the note addresses whether an Additional Commissioner who acts as the statutory approving authority may also impose a penalty for undisclosed foreign assets. It states that where approval by the Joint Commissioner or Joint Director is required for penalties above the prescribed threshold, the approving authority cannot exercise the separate power to impose the penalty. It also explains that a penalty cannot survive where the underlying assessment concerns the wrong assessment year: foreign-investment information, statement and tax payment relating to one year cannot support assessment and penalty for another year. The note further recognises that jurisdictional defects in the primary assessment may be challenged in consequential penalty proceedings.
Under the Black Money Act, the note addresses whether an Additional Commissioner who acts as the statutory approving authority may also impose a penalty for undisclosed foreign assets. It states that where approval by the Joint Commissioner or Joint Director is required for penalties above the prescribed threshold, the approving authority cannot exercise the separate power to impose the penalty. It also explains that a penalty cannot survive where the underlying assessment concerns the wrong assessment year: foreign-investment information, statement and tax payment relating to one year cannot support assessment and penalty for another year. The note further recognises that jurisdictional defects in the primary assessment may be challenged in consequential penalty proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.