Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
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...
Penalty for accepting cash sale consideration under section 271D was examined in a co-owned property transaction involving an alleged contravention of section 269SS. The relevant circumstances included disclosure of the full sale consideration for taxation after receipt of cash and the absence of penalty against a co-owner participating in the same transaction. Applying the coordinate Bench approach on identical facts, the penalty was deleted. The discussion treats subsequent tax disclosure, comparable treatment of co-owners, and reasonable cause as material considerations in determining whether a cash-acceptance penalty should stand.
Penalty for accepting cash sale consideration under section 271D was examined in a co-owned property transaction involving an alleged contravention of section 269SS. The relevant circumstances included disclosure of the full sale consideration for taxation after receipt of cash and the absence of penalty against a co-owner participating in the same transaction. Applying the coordinate Bench approach on identical facts, the penalty was deleted. The discussion treats subsequent tax disclosure, comparable treatment of co-owners, and reasonable cause as material considerations in determining whether a cash-acceptance penalty should stand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.