Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5861 to 5880 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was contested where taxability of interest and commitment fees turned on interpretation of the India Germany DTAA and whether a representative office constituted a Permanent Establishment; AO taxed receipts at 40% but Tribunal treated them under Article 11 at 10%. The CIT(A) and Tribunal found the addition arose from the assessee's voluntary disclosures and a bona fide difference of opinion, invoking Reliance Petroproducts that an unsustainable claim alone does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars. Consequently no penalty was warranted and the appellant's appeal was allowed.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) was contested where taxability of interest and commitment fees turned on interpretation of the India Germany DTAA and whether a representative office constituted a Permanent Establishment; AO taxed receipts at 40% but Tribunal treated them under Article 11 at 10%. The CIT(A) and Tribunal found the addition arose from the assessee's voluntary disclosures and a bona fide difference of opinion, invoking Reliance Petroproducts that an unsustainable claim alone does not constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars. Consequently no penalty was warranted and the appellant's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
