Penalty for estimation of income and disallowances for tax non-deduction clarified: estimation-based penalties not sustainable; additions without conc...
Managerial remuneration disallowance under s.40A(2)(b) challenged over alleged tax-avoidance; appellate decision restored deletion of addition for dir...
Service tax demand confirmed solely on the basis of CBDT/Form 26AS and income tax return data was held unsustainable because the Revenue made no independent verification, enquiry, or corroborative proof of taxable services. Mere comparison of returns could not by itself establish liability under the Finance Act, 1994. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable because suppression with intent to evade was not proved on the facts, and departmental correspondence did not amount to such suppression. As the demand failed on evidence and limitation, the consequential interest and penalty were also set aside.
Service tax demand confirmed solely on the basis of CBDT/Form 26AS and income tax return data was held unsustainable because the Revenue made no independent verification, enquiry, or corroborative proof of taxable services. Mere comparison of returns could not by itself establish liability under the Finance Act, 1994. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable because suppression with intent to evade was not proved on the facts, and departmental correspondence did not amount to such suppression. As the demand failed on evidence and limitation, the consequential interest and penalty were also set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
