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...
HC affirmed penalty proceedings under s271D were time-barred due to procedural delays. Initial reference by ITO on 16.11.2016 was followed by Show Cause Notice from Additional CIT only on 10.11.2017, with final penalty order issued on 22.02.2018. This exceeded statutory limitation period from reference date. Revenue provided no justification for delayed issuance of show cause notice. Court rejected Revenue's reliance on TAM TAM precedent as fact-specific, distinguishing it from present case. Tribunal's order upheld, finding proceedings initiated beyond limitation period invalid. Questions of law resolved in assessee's favor, invalidating penalty imposed for s269SS violations.
HC affirmed penalty proceedings under s271D were time-barred due to procedural delays. Initial reference by ITO on 16.11.2016 was followed by Show Cause Notice from Additional CIT only on 10.11.2017, with final penalty order issued on 22.02.2018. This exceeded statutory limitation period from reference date. Revenue provided no justification for delayed issuance of show cause notice. Court rejected Revenue's reliance on TAM TAM precedent as fact-specific, distinguishing it from present case. Tribunal's order upheld, finding proceedings initiated beyond limitation period invalid. Questions of law resolved in assessee's favor, invalidating penalty imposed for s269SS violations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.