Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT allowed the appeal and upheld the deletion of penalty under s.271(1)(c). The Tribunal held that for assessing concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars the return filed under s.153A must be the reference point where additional income is disclosed in that return and accepted by the AO without variation. Since the appellant voluntarily disclosed additional income in the s.153A return and no incriminating/seized material supported that addition, there was no concealment with reference to the s.153A return; consequently the penalty was unwarranted. Earlier conflicting authority was held distinguishable on facts, and the appellate authority's deletion of the penalty was sustained.
ITAT allowed the appeal and upheld the deletion of penalty under s.271(1)(c). The Tribunal held that for assessing concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars the return filed under s.153A must be the reference point where additional income is disclosed in that return and accepted by the AO without variation. Since the appellant voluntarily disclosed additional income in the s.153A return and no incriminating/seized material supported that addition, there was no concealment with reference to the s.153A return; consequently the penalty was unwarranted. Earlier conflicting authority was held distinguishable on facts, and the appellate authority's deletion of the penalty was sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
