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 allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty order under Section 271B, holding it void ab initio for being time-barred. The penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, requiring the penalty order to be passed by 30.06.2020 per Section 275(1)(c). However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on 30.07.2021, exceeding the statutory limitation period. The tribunal ruled that the penalty order was passed without jurisdiction and beyond prescribed time limits, violating procedural requirements and statutory conditions for penalty imposition. The order suffered from legal infirmity and could not be sustained, resulting in its complete set-aside.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty order under Section 271B, holding it void ab initio for being time-barred. The penalty notice was issued on 25.12.2019, requiring the penalty order to be passed by 30.06.2020 per Section 275(1)(c). However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on 30.07.2021, exceeding the statutory limitation period. The tribunal ruled that the penalty order was passed without jurisdiction and beyond prescribed time limits, violating procedural requirements and statutory conditions for penalty imposition. The order suffered from legal infirmity and could not be sustained, resulting in its complete set-aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.