Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
Whether penalty under s.13(1) FEMA for contravention relating to export proceeds/undervaluation should be enhanced up to three times was rejected because the provision prescribes only a maximum ceiling and no minimum or fixed penalty, leaving quantum to the adjudicating authority's judicious discretion based on facts and evidence. The adjudication order contained detailed, reasoned findings evaluating the record, and there is no statutory mandate to impose the maximum penalty merely because it is permissible. Consequently, the request for enhancement failed and the appeal was dismissed. - AT
Whether penalty under s.13(1) FEMA for contravention relating to export proceeds/undervaluation should be enhanced up to three times was rejected because the provision prescribes only a maximum ceiling and no minimum or fixed penalty, leaving quantum to the adjudicating authority's judicious discretion based on facts and evidence. The adjudication order contained detailed, reasoned findings evaluating the record, and there is no statutory mandate to impose the maximum penalty merely because it is permissible. Consequently, the request for enhancement failed and the appeal was dismissed. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.