Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty levied u/s 271DA - The Addl. CIT observed that the assessee had violated Section 269ST by splitting invoices for cash receipts of Rs. 2,00,000 or more from a single person. - The Appellate Tribunal noted that the items purchased were marriage dresses and different in nature. - Section 271DA prescribes penalties for contraventions of Section 269ST. The legislative intention behind the introduction of Section 269ST was to discourage cash transactions and promote digital economy. The Tribunal referred to judicial precedents, emphasizing that penalties may not be imposed for technical or venial breaches of the Act. It considered the definitions of 'good cause' and 'sufficient cause,' as well as relevant case laws to determine the applicability of penalties. - The Tribunal concluded that no penalty was leviable.
Penalty levied u/s 271DA - The Addl. CIT observed that the assessee had violated Section 269ST by splitting invoices for cash receipts of Rs. 2,00,000 or more from a single person. - The Appellate Tribunal noted that the items purchased were marriage dresses and different in nature. - Section 271DA prescribes penalties for contraventions of Section 269ST. The legislative intention behind the introduction of Section 269ST was to discourage cash transactions and promote digital economy. The Tribunal referred to judicial precedents, emphasizing that penalties may not be imposed for technical or venial breaches of the Act. It considered the definitions of 'good cause' and 'sufficient cause,' as well as relevant case laws to determine the applicability of penalties. - The Tribunal concluded that no penalty was leviable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
