Inaccurate-particulars penalties fail where transfer-pricing documentation shows good faith and due diligence, and underlying capital-gains additions ...
Transfer-pricing tolerance for software sub-licensing falls within the services range, eliminating the adjustment and requiring TDS-credit verificatio...
Customs Broker due diligence requires prescribed KYC, not detecting misdeclarations discoverable only through physical examination, defeating licence ...
E-filing system failure permits exclusion of affected time in insolvency appeals, preventing tribunal technology defects from defeating timely filings...
Pre-existing disputes over outcome-based professional fees can bar Section 9 insolvency proceedings where contractual entitlement requires investigati...
Corresponding scheduled offences preserve money-laundering jurisdiction despite repeal of the central corruption provision where conduct remains cover...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
741 to 760 of 97755 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The proviso to Section 270AA(4) bars rejection of a penalty-immunity application without a meaningful opportunity of hearing. Notice requiring appearance on the following day, followed by immediate rejection, was insufficient to allow applicants to present and substantiate their claims. The rejection orders were set aside, and the applications were remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the applicants and considering their material. Assessing Authorities were entitled to await expiry of the prescribed appeal period before deciding the applications; that delay did not invalidate the process.
The proviso to Section 270AA(4) bars rejection of a penalty-immunity application without a meaningful opportunity of hearing. Notice requiring appearance on the following day, followed by immediate rejection, was insufficient to allow applicants to present and substantiate their claims. The rejection orders were set aside, and the applications were remitted for fresh consideration after hearing the applicants and considering their material. Assessing Authorities were entitled to await expiry of the prescribed appeal period before deciding the applications; that delay did not invalidate the process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.