Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
ITAT allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee and upheld the CIT(A)'s quashing of the penalty under s.271E. The Tribunal held the penalty order was time-barred under s.275(1)(c) since the limitation expired on 31.03.2023 but the penalty was imposed on 28.08.2023. Alternatively, the Tribunal found the transactions did not fall within the prohibitions of ss.269SS/269T and thus did not attract s.271E. The Tribunal also noted absence of requisite satisfaction recorded in the assessment order for initiating penalty proceedings, rendering any levy unsustainable. Consequently, the penalty was cancelled and the revenue's demand set aside.
ITAT allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee and upheld the CIT(A)'s quashing of the penalty under s.271E. The Tribunal held the penalty order was time-barred under s.275(1)(c) since the limitation expired on 31.03.2023 but the penalty was imposed on 28.08.2023. Alternatively, the Tribunal found the transactions did not fall within the prohibitions of ss.269SS/269T and thus did not attract s.271E. The Tribunal also noted absence of requisite satisfaction recorded in the assessment order for initiating penalty proceedings, rendering any levy unsustainable. Consequently, the penalty was cancelled and the revenue's demand set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
