Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The assessee had not offered short-term capital gain u/s 50 on the sale of a depreciable fixed asset as income in the return or during scrutiny proceedings. The issue was whether the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income, attracting penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Tribunal held that if the disclosure of facts is incorrect or false to the knowledge of the assessee, and this is established, then such disclosure cannot take the assessee out of the purview of concealment of particulars or furnishing inaccurate particulars for the purpose of levy of penalty. However, in this case, there was no concealment as all necessary facts were available on record, and the disallowance of the claim admitted to be withdrawn by the assessee in the quantum proceedings was due to a wrong claim made. Therefore, the decision was in favor of the assessee, and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not leviable.
The assessee had not offered short-term capital gain u/s 50 on the sale of a depreciable fixed asset as income in the return or during scrutiny proceedings. The issue was whether the assessee had furnished inaccurate particulars of income, attracting penalty u/s 271(1)(c). The Tribunal held that if the disclosure of facts is incorrect or false to the knowledge of the assessee, and this is established, then such disclosure cannot take the assessee out of the purview of concealment of particulars or furnishing inaccurate particulars for the purpose of levy of penalty. However, in this case, there was no concealment as all necessary facts were available on record, and the disallowance of the claim admitted to be withdrawn by the assessee in the quantum proceedings was due to a wrong claim made. Therefore, the decision was in favor of the assessee, and penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was not leviable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
