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...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
941 to 960 of 95794 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.