Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2741 to 2760 of 96140 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 ruled on penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for estimation of income on bogus purchases. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an estimate basis unless clear proof of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars is shown. As the addition was based on 6% of unproved purchases, considered an estimate, the penalty was deemed unjustified. Therefore, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was deleted, allowing the assessee's appeal.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled on penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for estimation of income on bogus purchases. The tribunal held that penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an estimate basis unless clear proof of concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars is shown. As the addition was based on 6% of unproved purchases, considered an estimate, the penalty was deemed unjustified. Therefore, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was deleted, allowing the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.