Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit case to levy penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and concealment of income, which indicate that Assessing Officer has not recorded specific finding in respect of reason for imposing penalty in the final penalty order. - AT
Penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - recording of specific finding or not? - In para 7 of the penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c), the Assessing Officer held that it is found to be a fit case to levy penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961, for furnishing of inaccurate particulars and concealment of income, which indicate that Assessing Officer has not recorded specific finding in respect of reason for imposing penalty in the final penalty order. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
