Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT considered a case involving Penalty u/s 271B for not auditing books as per section 44AB. The Assessee argued books were not updated by the due date for audit under 44AB. The ITAT found the Assessee did not file returns u/s 139(1) and only did so after a notice u/s 148, indicating books were not updated timely. As per legal precedents, non-maintenance of accounts attracts penalty u/s 271A, not 271B. The ITAT ruled in favor of the Assessee, stating failure to maintain books by the due date u/s 139(1) absolved them from penalty u/s 271B for not auditing accounts. The contention that books were updated later was dismissed.
The ITAT considered a case involving Penalty u/s 271B for not auditing books as per section 44AB. The Assessee argued books were not updated by the due date for audit under 44AB. The ITAT found the Assessee did not file returns u/s 139(1) and only did so after a notice u/s 148, indicating books were not updated timely. As per legal precedents, non-maintenance of accounts attracts penalty u/s 271A, not 271B. The ITAT ruled in favor of the Assessee, stating failure to maintain books by the due date u/s 139(1) absolved them from penalty u/s 271B for not auditing accounts. The contention that books were updated later was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
