Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The ITAT examined a case involving alleged cash receipt for additional amenities in property transfer. The tribunal found that the total sale consideration for row houses was received through banking channels, with no violation of Section 269SS. The additional amounts were for specific interior work and reimbursements, not part of the primary sale consideration. The assessee's statement under Section 132(4) acknowledged receiving Rs. 1,37,73,000 for project-related amenities. After detailed scrutiny of sale agreements and transaction records, the ITAT concluded no specific sum was received contrary to statutory requirements. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and held that no penalty under Section 271D was leviable.
The ITAT examined a case involving alleged cash receipt for additional amenities in property transfer. The tribunal found that the total sale consideration for row houses was received through banking channels, with no violation of Section 269SS. The additional amounts were for specific interior work and reimbursements, not part of the primary sale consideration. The assessee's statement under Section 132(4) acknowledged receiving Rs. 1,37,73,000 for project-related amenities. After detailed scrutiny of sale agreements and transaction records, the ITAT concluded no specific sum was received contrary to statutory requirements. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and held that no penalty under Section 271D was leviable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
