Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
