Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AO's penalty order under s270A regarding leave salary exemption claimed on voluntary retirement under s10(10AA) was set aside by ITAT. The appellant, permanently absorbed in MTNL from government service, claimed full exemption in revised ITR based on genuine belief. ITAT held that penalty imposition is discretionary due to word "may" in s270A(1), not mandatory "shall". The bona fide belief clause in s270A(6)(a) supports discretionary interpretation. The claim's debatable nature was evident from SC judgments on employee rights in PSUs versus government service. The tribunal found appellant's explanation legitimate, noting full disclosure of service details and circumstances leading to exemption claim. Penalty order quashed considering genuine mistake and absence of deliberate misreporting.
AO's penalty order under s270A regarding leave salary exemption claimed on voluntary retirement under s10(10AA) was set aside by ITAT. The appellant, permanently absorbed in MTNL from government service, claimed full exemption in revised ITR based on genuine belief. ITAT held that penalty imposition is discretionary due to word "may" in s270A(1), not mandatory "shall". The bona fide belief clause in s270A(6)(a) supports discretionary interpretation. The claim's debatable nature was evident from SC judgments on employee rights in PSUs versus government service. The tribunal found appellant's explanation legitimate, noting full disclosure of service details and circumstances leading to exemption claim. Penalty order quashed considering genuine mistake and absence of deliberate misreporting.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
