Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
ITAT upheld initiation of penalty for under-reported income in consequence of misreporting because the assessment order and show-cause notice clearly conveyed the charge, and requiring a more exact sub-clause specification would go beyond section 270A. It also rejected immunity under section 270AA, holding that such relief is unavailable where penalty proceedings are initiated for misreporting, so the application became infructuous once section 270A(9) was invoked. However, the penalty was deleted on merits in relation to labour cess disallowance, since all material facts were disclosed, the omission was a bona fide computational error, and the addition was tax neutral, bringing the case within the exclusion for bona fide explanations.
ITAT upheld initiation of penalty for under-reported income in consequence of misreporting because the assessment order and show-cause notice clearly conveyed the charge, and requiring a more exact sub-clause specification would go beyond section 270A. It also rejected immunity under section 270AA, holding that such relief is unavailable where penalty proceedings are initiated for misreporting, so the application became infructuous once section 270A(9) was invoked. However, the penalty was deleted on merits in relation to labour cess disallowance, since all material facts were disclosed, the omission was a bona fide computational error, and the addition was tax neutral, bringing the case within the exclusion for bona fide explanations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.