Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
HC set aside trial court's discharge of accused No. 2 (director) in prosecution under s276B of Income Tax Act. Court held specific notice under s2(35) unnecessary when show cause notice indicated directors would be considered principal officers. Company's reply acknowledged prosecution notices against principal officers regarding TDS remittance delays. Trial court erred in concluding directors were not in charge of company affairs despite specific complaint allegations and documentary evidence (Exs.P5-P9). Defense arguments about notice and management role cannot be considered at discharge stage. Following Madhumilan Syntex precedent, separate notice unnecessary when show cause notice identifies directors as principal officers. Matter remanded for trial per law.
HC set aside trial court's discharge of accused No. 2 (director) in prosecution under s276B of Income Tax Act. Court held specific notice under s2(35) unnecessary when show cause notice indicated directors would be considered principal officers. Company's reply acknowledged prosecution notices against principal officers regarding TDS remittance delays. Trial court erred in concluding directors were not in charge of company affairs despite specific complaint allegations and documentary evidence (Exs.P5-P9). Defense arguments about notice and management role cannot be considered at discharge stage. Following Madhumilan Syntex precedent, separate notice unnecessary when show cause notice identifies directors as principal officers. Matter remanded for trial per law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
