Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT ruled that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on additional income voluntarily disclosed by the assessee during survey proceedings and subsequently included in tax returns. The AO relied solely on assumptions without corroborative evidence that the assessee had concealed income. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty provisions must be construed strictly and cannot be based on surmises or conjectures. Since the assessee made complete disclosure in the return of income and surrendered the amount for taxation purposes, there was no actual concealment or non-disclosure warranting penalty. Explanations 5 and 5A to section 271(1) were deemed exceptions to the general rule. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
The ITAT ruled that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed on additional income voluntarily disclosed by the assessee during survey proceedings and subsequently included in tax returns. The AO relied solely on assumptions without corroborative evidence that the assessee had concealed income. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty provisions must be construed strictly and cannot be based on surmises or conjectures. Since the assessee made complete disclosure in the return of income and surrendered the amount for taxation purposes, there was no actual concealment or non-disclosure warranting penalty. Explanations 5 and 5A to section 271(1) were deemed exceptions to the general rule. Appeal decided in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
