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...
Prosecution Proceedings - Offence u/s 276B and 278B - not depositing the TDS amount - The court acknowledged that the petitioners provided reasonable explanations for the delay in depositing the TDS amount, considering factors like insolvency proceedings and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. - The court found merit in the petitioners' reliance on Circular No. F No 285/90/2008-IT(Inv-I)/05 dated 24.04.2008, as it outlines conditions for prosecution under the Act. Additionally, the court cited precedents from both the Jharkhand High Court and its own jurisdiction, emphasizing that once the TDS amount with interest has been deposited, criminal proceedings should not continue.
Prosecution Proceedings - Offence u/s 276B and 278B - not depositing the TDS amount - The court acknowledged that the petitioners provided reasonable explanations for the delay in depositing the TDS amount, considering factors like insolvency proceedings and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. - The court found merit in the petitioners' reliance on Circular No. F No 285/90/2008-IT(Inv-I)/05 dated 24.04.2008, as it outlines conditions for prosecution under the Act. Additionally, the court cited precedents from both the Jharkhand High Court and its own jurisdiction, emphasizing that once the TDS amount with interest has been deposited, criminal proceedings should not continue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
