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 High Court held that prosecution u/ss 276C, 277, 278B, and 278E for tax evasion was invalid as it violated CBDT guidelines. Prosecution was premature without the penalty confirmed by ITAT, against the instructions. The CBDT policy requires processing for prosecution only after a penalty exceeding Rs. 50,000 is confirmed. As the ITAT set aside the penalty, prosecution was deemed unwarranted. Mens rea is essential for prosecution, and since ITAT deleted the penalty, continuing prosecution was unjust. The Supreme Court precedent establishes that penalty and prosecution go together; when penalty is deleted, prosecution cannot proceed. With no appeal filed against the ITAT order, prosecution was barred by finality. Following a SC ruling, exoneration in departmental proceedings leads to the failure of criminal prosecution. Petitions were allowed.
The High Court held that prosecution u/ss 276C, 277, 278B, and 278E for tax evasion was invalid as it violated CBDT guidelines. Prosecution was premature without the penalty confirmed by ITAT, against the instructions. The CBDT policy requires processing for prosecution only after a penalty exceeding Rs. 50,000 is confirmed. As the ITAT set aside the penalty, prosecution was deemed unwarranted. Mens rea is essential for prosecution, and since ITAT deleted the penalty, continuing prosecution was unjust. The Supreme Court precedent establishes that penalty and prosecution go together; when penalty is deleted, prosecution cannot proceed. With no appeal filed against the ITAT order, prosecution was barred by finality. Following a SC ruling, exoneration in departmental proceedings leads to the failure of criminal prosecution. Petitions were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
