Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
ITAT upheld imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) against the deceased's legal representatives, holding that section 159(1) renders legal representatives liable for tax and ancillary sums the deceased would have owed; therefore penalty proceedings can be continued or initiated against them. The bench rejected reliance on the contrary earlier precedent as having been overruled and sustained the penalty. Because the AR could not clarify whether the legal representatives inherited any estate or its extent, the Tribunal remanded the limited issue to the AO to determine the existence and extent of any estate capable of meeting the liability and to proceed accordingly.
ITAT upheld imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) against the deceased's legal representatives, holding that section 159(1) renders legal representatives liable for tax and ancillary sums the deceased would have owed; therefore penalty proceedings can be continued or initiated against them. The bench rejected reliance on the contrary earlier precedent as having been overruled and sustained the penalty. Because the AR could not clarify whether the legal representatives inherited any estate or its extent, the Tribunal remanded the limited issue to the AO to determine the existence and extent of any estate capable of meeting the liability and to proceed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
