Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 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 considered levy of penalty u/s 271B for a default related to Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB. The appellant obtained the audit report on time but inadvertently submitted wrong information in the ITR. Tax authorities rejected this explanation, alleging non-compliance with u/s 44AB. However, the auditor confirmed preparing the audit report timely. The ITAT found the penalty unjust as the audit report was obtained within the deadline, and the mistake was due to selecting the wrong column in the ITR. Consequently, the penalty u/s 271B was deemed inapplicable, and the appellant's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT considered levy of penalty u/s 271B for a default related to Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB. The appellant obtained the audit report on time but inadvertently submitted wrong information in the ITR. Tax authorities rejected this explanation, alleging non-compliance with u/s 44AB. However, the auditor confirmed preparing the audit report timely. The ITAT found the penalty unjust as the audit report was obtained within the deadline, and the mistake was due to selecting the wrong column in the ITR. Consequently, the penalty u/s 271B was deemed inapplicable, and the appellant's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.