Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
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...
The HC dismissed the challenge, holding that the assessee had disclosed acquisition of the foreign asset in the original returns for AY 2012-13 and 2013-14 and in the return filed under s.153A prior to issuance of any penalty notice; books of account corroborated the disclosure. Applying the principle that a return filed under s.153A qualifies as a return for purposes of s.139(1), the tribunal and commissioner correctly concluded there was no failure to disclose and that imposition of the Rs.10 lakh penalty was not warranted on account of a remediable technical formatting defect. No substantial question of law arises.
The HC dismissed the challenge, holding that the assessee had disclosed acquisition of the foreign asset in the original returns for AY 2012-13 and 2013-14 and in the return filed under s.153A prior to issuance of any penalty notice; books of account corroborated the disclosure. Applying the principle that a return filed under s.153A qualifies as a return for purposes of s.139(1), the tribunal and commissioner correctly concluded there was no failure to disclose and that imposition of the Rs.10 lakh penalty was not warranted on account of a remediable technical formatting defect. No substantial question of law arises.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
