Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Acquittal of charge u/s 276CC - respondent has failed to comply with the provisions contained u/s 139(1) and he has submitted the income tax returns after a delay of 28 months - The High Court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent had the requisite mens rea to evade tax. Considering the explanations provided by the respondent regarding the delay in filing income tax returns, the court found no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing. The court upheld the judgment of the trial court, acquitting the respondent of the charges under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Acquittal of charge u/s 276CC - respondent has failed to comply with the provisions contained u/s 139(1) and he has submitted the income tax returns after a delay of 28 months - The High Court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent had the requisite mens rea to evade tax. Considering the explanations provided by the respondent regarding the delay in filing income tax returns, the court found no evidence of deliberate wrongdoing. The court upheld the judgment of the trial court, acquitting the respondent of the charges under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.