Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) turns on the assessee's intention: an inadvertent or unintentional omission does not attract penalty, but a conscious non-disclosure or false exemption claim constitutes concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars. On the facts, the assessee had paid advance tax on the capital gains yet claimed exemption in the return and sought a refund, which the Court treated as a deliberate attempt to avoid tax discovered on scrutiny. The explanation of a typographical error in the Chartered Accountant's computation was rejected, and the cited advance ruling was held inapplicable on its different facts. The Tribunal's restoration of penalty was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Penalty under section 271(1)(c) turns on the assessee's intention: an inadvertent or unintentional omission does not attract penalty, but a conscious non-disclosure or false exemption claim constitutes concealment and furnishing of inaccurate particulars. On the facts, the assessee had paid advance tax on the capital gains yet claimed exemption in the return and sought a refund, which the Court treated as a deliberate attempt to avoid tax discovered on scrutiny. The explanation of a typographical error in the Chartered Accountant's computation was rejected, and the cited advance ruling was held inapplicable on its different facts. The Tribunal's restoration of penalty was upheld and the appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
