Minimum alternate tax exclusions for pre-amendment banking companies and expatriate Indian branch salaries remain outside head office expenditure limi...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1101 to 1120 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - disallowance made u/s. 35(2AB) - The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that the term 'particulars' under section 271(1)(c) includes the details of the claim made. In the absence of any incorrect or inaccurate information provided in the return, penalty cannot be imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars. - Since the DSIR approval was not available to the assessee at the time of filing the return, any subsequent restriction on the deduction claimed cannot be considered as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
Levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) - disallowance made u/s. 35(2AB) - The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd., where it was held that the term 'particulars' under section 271(1)(c) includes the details of the claim made. In the absence of any incorrect or inaccurate information provided in the return, penalty cannot be imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars. - Since the DSIR approval was not available to the assessee at the time of filing the return, any subsequent restriction on the deduction claimed cannot be considered as furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
