Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.