Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Penalty under s.270A was levied for alleged misreporting, on the footing that purchase returns were not properly accounted and excess purchases were added to income. The tribunal held that the discrepancy was explained as arising from purchase returns and there was no misrepresentation or suppression of facts within s.270A(9)(a); mere non-acceptance of the explanation and consequent addition did not convert the case into misreporting. The assessee's decision not to further contest the addition and to pay tax while seeking immunity under s.270AA also did not establish misreporting. Accordingly, the penalty could not be sustained and was deleted; the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Penalty under s.270A was levied for alleged misreporting, on the footing that purchase returns were not properly accounted and excess purchases were added to income. The tribunal held that the discrepancy was explained as arising from purchase returns and there was no misrepresentation or suppression of facts within s.270A(9)(a); mere non-acceptance of the explanation and consequent addition did not convert the case into misreporting. The assessee's decision not to further contest the addition and to pay tax while seeking immunity under s.270AA also did not establish misreporting. Accordingly, the penalty could not be sustained and was deleted; the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
