Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
Non-disclosure of foreign assets and false statements made by the petitioners, office bearers of certain business establishments of two British Companies, u/s 50 of the Black Money Act. The Act came into force on 01-07-2015, and the petitioners were summoned and assessed u/s 10 in 2018. The High Court held that criminal law cannot be set into motion against the petitioners as it violates Article 20 of the Constitution, which is a fundamental right and supersedes any statutory provision. The rigour of the Act's provisions fails to pass the muster of Article 20, leading to the obliteration of the crime against the petitioners. The impugned order regarding criminal liability u/s 72(c) of the Act remains stayed.
Non-disclosure of foreign assets and false statements made by the petitioners, office bearers of certain business establishments of two British Companies, u/s 50 of the Black Money Act. The Act came into force on 01-07-2015, and the petitioners were summoned and assessed u/s 10 in 2018. The High Court held that criminal law cannot be set into motion against the petitioners as it violates Article 20 of the Constitution, which is a fundamental right and supersedes any statutory provision. The rigour of the Act's provisions fails to pass the muster of Article 20, leading to the obliteration of the crime against the petitioners. The impugned order regarding criminal liability u/s 72(c) of the Act remains stayed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
