Income Declaration Scheme declarations can evidence share-capital sources, while round-tripped funds and cash-linked credits require further verificat...
Permanent establishment tests: independent subsidiary premises and principal-to-principal dealings did not create Indian taxability for offshore suppl...
Valuation Officer estimates govern property-value additions once statutory valuation is invoked, requiring fresh consideration of objections and compa...
Waiver of written show-cause notice may prevent a later procedural challenge after participation in customs adjudication, preserving statutory appella...
Retrospective invalidity of ocean-freight IGST supports refunds despite non-party status and prior credit utilisation, subject to authorised appeal gr...
Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars does not arise...
Inaccurate-particulars penalties fail where transfer-pricing documentation shows good faith and due diligence, and underlying capital-gains additions are deleted.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars does not arise merely because a transfer-pricing comparable is rejected or an interest rate on an associated-enterprise loan is recomputed, where prescribed documentation and benchmarking demonstrate good faith and due diligence in determining the arm's length price. A leave-encashment provision claimed after payment of tax pursuant to an Apex Court stay order did not warrant penalty. Penalty on legal fees claimed in computing capital gains also lacked basis where supporting transfer documents and expenditure details were furnished and the underlying quantum addition was deleted. Penalty deletions were sustained for the transfer-pricing adjustments and disallowances.
Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars does not arise merely because a transfer-pricing comparable is rejected or an interest rate on an associated-enterprise loan is recomputed, where prescribed documentation and benchmarking demonstrate good faith and due diligence in determining the arm's length price. A leave-encashment provision claimed after payment of tax pursuant to an Apex Court stay order did not warrant penalty. Penalty on legal fees claimed in computing capital gains also lacked basis where supporting transfer documents and expenditure details were furnished and the underlying quantum addition was deleted. Penalty deletions were sustained for the transfer-pricing adjustments and disallowances.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4896 
