Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
ITAT ruled against penalty under s.270A for under-reporting income. Taxpayer met substantive conditions for immunity under s.270AA(1) by paying assessed tax and interest within prescribed time after declaring Rs.30 lakhs under PMGKY scheme. While Form 68 wasn't filed with AO, ITAT held this procedural omission shouldn't override substantive compliance. Citing principle that technical procedures shouldn't impede substantial justice, tribunal found non-filing of Form 68 was merely technical breach. Since taxpayer satisfied core requirements of s.270AA(1)(a)&(b), immunity from penalty was granted despite procedural lapse. Appeal decided in taxpayer's favor, setting aside penalty under s.270A.
ITAT ruled against penalty under s.270A for under-reporting income. Taxpayer met substantive conditions for immunity under s.270AA(1) by paying assessed tax and interest within prescribed time after declaring Rs.30 lakhs under PMGKY scheme. While Form 68 wasn't filed with AO, ITAT held this procedural omission shouldn't override substantive compliance. Citing principle that technical procedures shouldn't impede substantial justice, tribunal found non-filing of Form 68 was merely technical breach. Since taxpayer satisfied core requirements of s.270AA(1)(a)&(b), immunity from penalty was granted despite procedural lapse. Appeal decided in taxpayer's favor, setting aside penalty under s.270A.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.