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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Penalty under s. 270A(1) r/w s. 270A(9)(c) for alleged false expense claims was examined where the underlying addition comprised an ad hoc disallowance sustained at 20% on an estimated basis. Since the income adjustment was purely estimative and did not meet the statutory parameters of "under-reported income" warranting penal consequences, and the AO had not recorded the requisite satisfaction to justify levy under s. 270A, the penalty was held arbitrary and void ab initio. Penalty was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Penalty under s. 270A(1) r/w s. 270A(9)(c) for alleged false expense claims was examined where the underlying addition comprised an ad hoc disallowance sustained at 20% on an estimated basis. Since the income adjustment was purely estimative and did not meet the statutory parameters of "under-reported income" warranting penal consequences, and the AO had not recorded the requisite satisfaction to justify levy under s. 270A, the penalty was held arbitrary and void ab initio. Penalty was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.