Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving the disallowance of electricity expenses leading to a penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Tribunal noted the essential role of a sorting machine, powered by electricity, in the business activity. The machine was part of the Plant & Machinery and depreciation had been allowed by the Assessing Officer. While the electricity bill was in the husband's name due to the machine being used in his godown, the lack of direct evidence led to disallowance. The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation to be bona fide, not mala fide, as the claim was not entirely baseless. Citing a relevant case, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted, as the assessee had not concealed income intentionally. Consequently, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving the disallowance of electricity expenses leading to a penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Tribunal noted the essential role of a sorting machine, powered by electricity, in the business activity. The machine was part of the Plant & Machinery and depreciation had been allowed by the Assessing Officer. While the electricity bill was in the husband's name due to the machine being used in his godown, the lack of direct evidence led to disallowance. The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation to be bona fide, not mala fide, as the claim was not entirely baseless. Citing a relevant case, the Tribunal concluded that the penalty was unwarranted, as the assessee had not concealed income intentionally. Consequently, the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was deleted, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
