Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1121 to 1140 of 95999 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that the objection of the assessee regarding low tax effect was not sustainable. The addition made u/s 68 for bogus LTCG and unexplained cash credits involved penny stocks. The Tribunal cannot determine if a share is a penny stock, which is decided by BSE or investigation agencies. The transaction involved shares identified as penny stocks by the Investigation Directorate. The Tribunal found no merit in the objections raised by the assessee and dismissed the request to recall the order. The power u/s 254(2) cannot be used to review the order on its merits. The assessee's application is dismissed, citing judicial discipline and referring to a decision by the Supreme Court.
The Tribunal held that the objection of the assessee regarding low tax effect was not sustainable. The addition made u/s 68 for bogus LTCG and unexplained cash credits involved penny stocks. The Tribunal cannot determine if a share is a penny stock, which is decided by BSE or investigation agencies. The transaction involved shares identified as penny stocks by the Investigation Directorate. The Tribunal found no merit in the objections raised by the assessee and dismissed the request to recall the order. The power u/s 254(2) cannot be used to review the order on its merits. The assessee's application is dismissed, citing judicial discipline and referring to a decision by the Supreme Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.