Unlawful outward remittances via Hawala using proforma invoices and electronic records proved; documents admitted, directors penalised, penalties redu...
Attachment of equivalent-value properties as proceeds of crime upheld; preventive attachment order and confirmation sustained; no independent ED reinv...
Broker trading-system "technical glitch" redefinition and narrowed incident-reporting regime for large IBT/STWT brokers requiring 2-hr notice and 14-w...
An application under Section 119(2)(b) challenged refusal to permit filing a revised return beyond five years; the High Court found the taxpayer had pursued rectification within the five year window and had reasonably relied on rectification as the remedy. The court held the authority could not ignore the circular's temporal condition, treated the misdeclaration as a bona fide error without deciding revised return merits, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration of the revised return for the relevant assessment year in accordance with law.
An application under Section 119(2)(b) challenged refusal to permit filing a revised return beyond five years; the High Court found the taxpayer had pursued rectification within the five year window and had reasonably relied on rectification as the remedy. The court held the authority could not ignore the circular's temporal condition, treated the misdeclaration as a bona fide error without deciding revised return merits, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration of the revised return for the relevant assessment year in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
