Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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 
