Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The SC held that mere non-disclosure of receipts in service tax returns doesn't mean intent to evade tax payment. To invoke extended limitation period u/s 73(1) proviso of Finance Act 1994, deliberate and willful attempt to evade duty must be evident from assessee's conduct or records. Mere interpretation dispute doesn't justify extended period. Bona fide belief in non-liability, even if wrong, doesn't render it malafide. In self-assessment, assessee determines liability based on judgment; facts coming to light later doesn't prove evasion intent. The Department couldn't invoke extended period against the assessee for April 2008-March 2013 as no evasion intent was assigned. Appeal allowed.
The SC held that mere non-disclosure of receipts in service tax returns doesn't mean intent to evade tax payment. To invoke extended limitation period u/s 73(1) proviso of Finance Act 1994, deliberate and willful attempt to evade duty must be evident from assessee's conduct or records. Mere interpretation dispute doesn't justify extended period. Bona fide belief in non-liability, even if wrong, doesn't render it malafide. In self-assessment, assessee determines liability based on judgment; facts coming to light later doesn't prove evasion intent. The Department couldn't invoke extended period against the assessee for April 2008-March 2013 as no evasion intent was assigned. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
