Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The appellant was liable to pay service tax on banking and financial services, but their failure to do so was not willful or deliberate. The non-disclosure of certain assessable items does not attract the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. No penalty is imposable on the appellant, but they must pay interest on the belated payment of tax u/s 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. The High Court partially allowed the appeal, holding that no penalty is payable by the appellant under any provisions of the Act, but they must pay interest on the belated tax payment.
The appellant was liable to pay service tax on banking and financial services, but their failure to do so was not willful or deliberate. The non-disclosure of certain assessable items does not attract the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. No penalty is imposable on the appellant, but they must pay interest on the belated payment of tax u/s 75 of the Finance Act, 1994. The High Court partially allowed the appeal, holding that no penalty is payable by the appellant under any provisions of the Act, but they must pay interest on the belated tax payment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
