Income-tax prosecution fails when appellate remand removes its factual foundation; directors require company arraignment for vicarious criminal liabil...
Capital character of assignment consideration prevents taxation as residuary income, while unsupported interest-related expenditure remains non-deduct...
Make-available condition shields regional support-service receipts from Indian taxation where no independent capability or permanent establishment exi...
Transfer-pricing treatment of corporate guarantees and convertible loans followed prior-year consistency, with taxable foreign dividends excluded from...
Transfer-pricing benchmarking confines adjustments to associated-enterprise transactions and integrates delayed receivables through TNMM working-capit...
Medical relief status protects government-contracted mobile healthcare from commercial classification, while provisional registration cancellation req...
Charitable registration cancellation requires proof that educational activities abandoned their objects; incidental receipts and retained surplus are ...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not leviable where a taxpayer fully discloses a slump-sale transaction, consideration and negative net worth, but computes capital gains by treating negative net worth as nil on a bona fide legal interpretation. A claim that is ultimately unsustainable does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars merely because a quantum addition is sustained or not contested. Divergent Tribunal views and admission of a substantial question of law support the conclusion that the treatment of negative net worth was genuinely debatable. The penalty deletion was sustained and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) is not leviable where a taxpayer fully discloses a slump-sale transaction, consideration and negative net worth, but computes capital gains by treating negative net worth as nil on a bona fide legal interpretation. A claim that is ultimately unsustainable does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars merely because a quantum addition is sustained or not contested. Divergent Tribunal views and admission of a substantial question of law support the conclusion that the treatment of negative net worth was genuinely debatable. The penalty deletion was sustained and the Revenue's appeal failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.