Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Page of 4897
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2061 to 2080 of 97923 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty proceedings for concealment require the Assessing Officer to reach satisfaction during assessment; a later notice cannot replace that jurisdictional requirement. Section 271(1) uses "may", preserving discretion and preventing automatic penalty merely because additional income is declared in returns filed under section 148. The deeming fiction in section 271(1B) applies strictly only where an addition or disallowance is made and the assessment order contains a clear direction to initiate penalty. A statement that proceedings "will be initiated separately" is only a future intention. Explanation 5A may deem concealment in specified circumstances but cannot cure invalid initiation or make penalty automatic. Penalties were deleted, while their merits remained open.
Penalty proceedings for concealment require the Assessing Officer to reach satisfaction during assessment; a later notice cannot replace that jurisdictional requirement. Section 271(1) uses "may", preserving discretion and preventing automatic penalty merely because additional income is declared in returns filed under section 148. The deeming fiction in section 271(1B) applies strictly only where an addition or disallowance is made and the assessment order contains a clear direction to initiate penalty. A statement that proceedings "will be initiated separately" is only a future intention. Explanation 5A may deem concealment in specified circumstances but cannot cure invalid initiation or make penalty automatic. Penalties were deleted, while their merits remained open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.