Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
ITAT held that no specific charge was framed against the assessee in the show-cause notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 270A for misreporting of income. While the assessment order did not specify the exact charge, the show-cause notice initiated penalty proceedings for both under-reporting and misreporting of income. However, in the penalty order, the Assessing Officer concluded it was a case of under-reporting due to misreporting of income and levied penalty u/s 270A(9)(a). ITAT decided in favour of the assessee on the ground that no clear charge was framed in the show-cause notice.
ITAT held that no specific charge was framed against the assessee in the show-cause notice issued u/s 274 read with Section 270A for misreporting of income. While the assessment order did not specify the exact charge, the show-cause notice initiated penalty proceedings for both under-reporting and misreporting of income. However, in the penalty order, the Assessing Officer concluded it was a case of under-reporting due to misreporting of income and levied penalty u/s 270A(9)(a). ITAT decided in favour of the assessee on the ground that no clear charge was framed in the show-cause notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
