Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Penalty u/s 271D - additions were confirmed towards share application money as a colorable device - AO considered the same as deemed deposits and considered it as violation of section 2695S - AO has presumably failed to construe the transaction as well as meaning of section 269SS read with section 271D. The more surprising factor is that ld. Principal CIT (Admin.), who has given permission to file the appeal, failed to appreciate the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) before authorizing the revenue to file the appeal before the Tribunal. - AT
Penalty u/s 271D - additions were confirmed towards share application money as a colorable device - AO considered the same as deemed deposits and considered it as violation of section 2695S - AO has presumably failed to construe the transaction as well as meaning of section 269SS read with section 271D. The more surprising factor is that ld. Principal CIT (Admin.), who has given permission to file the appeal, failed to appreciate the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) before authorizing the revenue to file the appeal before the Tribunal. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
