Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Invocation of the extended limitation proviso was examined on whether bona fide belief about Notification No.30/2012 and allocation of tax liability to service recipients supplied a plausible basis for non-payment; the analysis applied authorities requiring fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts to invoke the extended five-year period. Absent documentary proof of transfer of possession or specific averments proving mala fide conduct or positive acts of suppression, mere non-payment or incomplete returns did not satisfy the threshold, and the extended-period demand was held unsustainable.
Invocation of the extended limitation proviso was examined on whether bona fide belief about Notification No.30/2012 and allocation of tax liability to service recipients supplied a plausible basis for non-payment; the analysis applied authorities requiring fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts to invoke the extended five-year period. Absent documentary proof of transfer of possession or specific averments proving mala fide conduct or positive acts of suppression, mere non-payment or incomplete returns did not satisfy the threshold, and the extended-period demand was held unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
