Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1121 to 1140 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the assessee's plea towards non-applicability of Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act was devoid of rationale. The Tribunal affirmed the existence of undisclosed income discovered during the search, based on cogent evidence of unexplained liabilities and unrecorded expenditures, which met the definition of 'undisclosed income' u/s 271AAB. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's contention regarding the non-existence of undisclosed income, stating that the assessee's conduct accepted the existence of undisclosed income. Regarding the quantum of penalty, the Tribunal observed that while the Assessing Officer imposed a 30% penalty under clause (c) of Section 271AAB(1), there appears to be a legislative aberration wherein an assessee admitting undisclosed income but failing to specify the manner of deriving it faces a higher penalty compared to an assessee who does not make any admission during the search.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the assessee's plea towards non-applicability of Section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act was devoid of rationale. The Tribunal affirmed the existence of undisclosed income discovered during the search, based on cogent evidence of unexplained liabilities and unrecorded expenditures, which met the definition of 'undisclosed income' u/s 271AAB. The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's contention regarding the non-existence of undisclosed income, stating that the assessee's conduct accepted the existence of undisclosed income. Regarding the quantum of penalty, the Tribunal observed that while the Assessing Officer imposed a 30% penalty under clause (c) of Section 271AAB(1), there appears to be a legislative aberration wherein an assessee admitting undisclosed income but failing to specify the manner of deriving it faces a higher penalty compared to an assessee who does not make any admission during the search.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
