Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
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 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
