Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Penalty u/s. 271E - period of limitation - There is no dispute that the period of limitation is required to be examined as per Section 275(1)(c) - it is futile to contend that the date of initiation of proceedings is the date on which the JCIT receives intimation from the AO or the date on which the JCIT issues SCN to the Assessee - AO having initiated the penalty proceedings in assessment order dated 24.3.2016 and imposed on 27.1.2017 - bared by limitation
Penalty u/s. 271E - period of limitation - There is no dispute that the period of limitation is required to be examined as per Section 275(1)(c) - it is futile to contend that the date of initiation of proceedings is the date on which the JCIT receives intimation from the AO or the date on which the JCIT issues SCN to the Assessee - AO having initiated the penalty proceedings in assessment order dated 24.3.2016 and imposed on 27.1.2017 - bared by limitation
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
