Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of the penalty levied on the assessee under s.271G. The Tribunal held that Rule 10D prescribes thirteen categories of documents to be maintained for international and specified domestic transactions, and an AO initiating penalty proceedings under s.271G must specify which particular document(s) under Rule 10D were not maintained. The penalty order, prepared by the TPO, instead penalised the assessee for failure to benchmark transactions, which does not constitute non-maintenance of documents under s.271G. Consequently, the penalty was untenable and properly deleted.
ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of the penalty levied on the assessee under s.271G. The Tribunal held that Rule 10D prescribes thirteen categories of documents to be maintained for international and specified domestic transactions, and an AO initiating penalty proceedings under s.271G must specify which particular document(s) under Rule 10D were not maintained. The penalty order, prepared by the TPO, instead penalised the assessee for failure to benchmark transactions, which does not constitute non-maintenance of documents under s.271G. Consequently, the penalty was untenable and properly deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
