PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The ITAT set aside penalties imposed on the appellant under sections 271C and 272A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Act. Following the Supreme Court's decision in US Technologies (2023), the Tribunal held that section 271C penalties apply only to failure to deduct tax at source, not to delayed remittance of TDS already deducted. The SC had noted that penalty provisions must be interpreted strictly, with CBDT Circular No.551 confirming this position. Regarding penalties under section 272A(2)(g) for delayed filing of TDS returns, the Tribunal found these were incorrectly imposed as section 271H was the applicable provision during the relevant period. The appeal was allowed and all penalties were set aside.
The ITAT set aside penalties imposed on the appellant under sections 271C and 272A(2)(g) of the Income Tax Act. Following the Supreme Court's decision in US Technologies (2023), the Tribunal held that section 271C penalties apply only to failure to deduct tax at source, not to delayed remittance of TDS already deducted. The SC had noted that penalty provisions must be interpreted strictly, with CBDT Circular No.551 confirming this position. Regarding penalties under section 272A(2)(g) for delayed filing of TDS returns, the Tribunal found these were incorrectly imposed as section 271H was the applicable provision during the relevant period. The appeal was allowed and all penalties were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
