Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Levy of penalty u/s 234E - delay of 484 days in filling Form No. 26Q (TDS Return) - technical glitches on the part of the system - The ITAT allowed the appeals, focusing on the legal and technical nuances presented. The tribunal found that the appeals were filed within the extended limitation period provided by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It also highlighted that the technical issues faced by the assessee in filing TDS returns were not considered by the CIT(A), which led to an unjust imposition of late fees.
Levy of penalty u/s 234E - delay of 484 days in filling Form No. 26Q (TDS Return) - technical glitches on the part of the system - The ITAT allowed the appeals, focusing on the legal and technical nuances presented. The tribunal found that the appeals were filed within the extended limitation period provided by the Supreme Court due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It also highlighted that the technical issues faced by the assessee in filing TDS returns were not considered by the CIT(A), which led to an unjust imposition of late fees.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.