Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96333 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 271AAB was contested on the ground that the search team failed to examine or ascertain the source of cash and jewellery and did not inform searched persons of the disclosure obligation under section 132(4); the failure of authorised officers to question and elicit disclosures was held determinative of the penalty rate, leading to the conclusion that the lesser statutory penalty rate should apply. The assessing officer was directed to recompute the penalty at the lower rate and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Penalty under section 271AAB was contested on the ground that the search team failed to examine or ascertain the source of cash and jewellery and did not inform searched persons of the disclosure obligation under section 132(4); the failure of authorised officers to question and elicit disclosures was held determinative of the penalty rate, leading to the conclusion that the lesser statutory penalty rate should apply. The assessing officer was directed to recompute the penalty at the lower rate and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.