Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, considered the issue of penalty u/s 271G in a case involving Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment. The assessee did not initially provide segment-wise results for international transactions but later submitted the information to the TPO upon query. Despite this, the TPO imposed a penalty u/s 271G without proposing any Arm’s Length Price adjustment. The ITAT noted precedents where penalties were deleted in similar cases. The CIT(A) also referred to relevant decisions and deleted the penalty, citing the substantial compliance by the assessee, the nature of the diamond trade, and the absence of any Arm’s Length Price adjustment. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's grounds for appeal.
The ITAT, an Appellate Tribunal, considered the issue of penalty u/s 271G in a case involving Transfer Pricing (TP) adjustment. The assessee did not initially provide segment-wise results for international transactions but later submitted the information to the TPO upon query. Despite this, the TPO imposed a penalty u/s 271G without proposing any Arm’s Length Price adjustment. The ITAT noted precedents where penalties were deleted in similar cases. The CIT(A) also referred to relevant decisions and deleted the penalty, citing the substantial compliance by the assessee, the nature of the diamond trade, and the absence of any Arm’s Length Price adjustment. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's grounds for appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
