Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3341 to 3360 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the assessee's appeal as not maintainable due to pending liquidation process. Penalty u/s 271 imposed for failure to audit accounts u/s 44AB. IBC 2016 prevails over IT Act, limiting Income Tax authorities' jurisdiction during moratorium. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating tax dues issue despite liquidation process, which was within scope. Failure to adjudicate on merit by CIT(A) despite no legal impediments. IT authorities can determine tax dues during moratorium. Case restored to CIT(A) for proper adjudication.
The ITAT Mumbai dismissed the assessee's appeal as not maintainable due to pending liquidation process. Penalty u/s 271 imposed for failure to audit accounts u/s 44AB. IBC 2016 prevails over IT Act, limiting Income Tax authorities' jurisdiction during moratorium. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating tax dues issue despite liquidation process, which was within scope. Failure to adjudicate on merit by CIT(A) despite no legal impediments. IT authorities can determine tax dues during moratorium. Case restored to CIT(A) for proper adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
