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...
The ITAT upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) imposed on the assessee for concealing/furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by claiming depreciation on inflated and bogus asset purchases. The tribunal rejected the assessee's contention that no penalty should apply to the disallowance related to inflated asset costs, despite a favorable quantum decision in a separate case, finding no merit in this argument. Regarding depreciation on bogus assets, the tribunal noted the assessee's acceptance of the CIT(A) order and affirmed the findings that the purchased assets were from non-genuine parties, corroborated by departmental investigations and admissions from associated group officials. The tribunal distinguished the present facts from the cited case relied upon by the assessee, concluding no relief was warranted. Consequently, the ITAT confirmed the levy of penalty on disallowed depreciation pertaining to both inflated and bogus asset purchases.
The ITAT upheld the penalty under section 271(1)(c) imposed on the assessee for concealing/furnishing inaccurate particulars of income by claiming depreciation on inflated and bogus asset purchases. The tribunal rejected the assessee's contention that no penalty should apply to the disallowance related to inflated asset costs, despite a favorable quantum decision in a separate case, finding no merit in this argument. Regarding depreciation on bogus assets, the tribunal noted the assessee's acceptance of the CIT(A) order and affirmed the findings that the purchased assets were from non-genuine parties, corroborated by departmental investigations and admissions from associated group officials. The tribunal distinguished the present facts from the cited case relied upon by the assessee, concluding no relief was warranted. Consequently, the ITAT confirmed the levy of penalty on disallowed depreciation pertaining to both inflated and bogus asset purchases.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.