Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Complaint filed u/s 276CC for non-filing of returns. Assessee argued no taxable income and department accepted it. Proviso B of Section 276CC exempts prosecution if tax payable after regular assessment does not exceed Rs. 3,000/-. Principal Commissioner clarified this exemption applies only when regular assessment is framed, which was not done in this case. Court followed Anil Kumar Sinha vs. Union of India and CIT vs. Kerala Chemicals and Proteins Limited judgments, holding assessee does not fall under regular assessment to get exemption under proviso to Section 276CC. Trial already commenced, complainant examined, cross-examination deferred at petitioner's request. Not a fit case for quashing, petitioner to face trial and put forth defense.
Complaint filed u/s 276CC for non-filing of returns. Assessee argued no taxable income and department accepted it. Proviso B of Section 276CC exempts prosecution if tax payable after regular assessment does not exceed Rs. 3,000/-. Principal Commissioner clarified this exemption applies only when regular assessment is framed, which was not done in this case. Court followed Anil Kumar Sinha vs. Union of India and CIT vs. Kerala Chemicals and Proteins Limited judgments, holding assessee does not fall under regular assessment to get exemption under proviso to Section 276CC. Trial already commenced, complainant examined, cross-examination deferred at petitioner's request. Not a fit case for quashing, petitioner to face trial and put forth defense.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
