Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
