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" ?
Quashing of the penalty for undisclosed income removed the foundational finding of wilful tax evasion required to continue prosecution for an offence under section 276C(1)(i). Following a coordinate-bench ruling, the High Court treated the Tribunal's penalty order as effective because it had not been stayed; the Department's pending appeal did not justify continuation of criminal proceedings. The prosecution was quashed, while preserving the Department's liberty to seek revival and recall if the Tribunal's order is reversed in the pending appeal.
Quashing of the penalty for undisclosed income removed the foundational finding of wilful tax evasion required to continue prosecution for an offence under section 276C(1)(i). Following a coordinate-bench ruling, the High Court treated the Tribunal's penalty order as effective because it had not been stayed; the Department's pending appeal did not justify continuation of criminal proceedings. The prosecution was quashed, while preserving the Department's liberty to seek revival and recall if the Tribunal's order is reversed in the pending appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.