Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Invoked extended limitation under the proviso to section 28(1) was rejected because revenue failed to prove deliberate suppression to evade duty; first check, examination and Textile Committee testing matched declared goods and an out-of-charge order was issued, showing departmental knowledge. The claim that end use was unknown at first check did not establish intent to evade. Consequently, demands founded solely on the extended period, including duty, interest, penalty and confiscation, were vacated and the appeal allowed.
Invoked extended limitation under the proviso to section 28(1) was rejected because revenue failed to prove deliberate suppression to evade duty; first check, examination and Textile Committee testing matched declared goods and an out-of-charge order was issued, showing departmental knowledge. The claim that end use was unknown at first check did not establish intent to evade. Consequently, demands founded solely on the extended period, including duty, interest, penalty and confiscation, were vacated and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
