Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was sustained because the assessee's non-disclosure of capital gains was found to be neither bona fide nor based on a plausible exemption claim. The Court held that the relevant test is whether the omission to disclose taxable income was a genuine mistake or was intended to avoid tax. On the facts, the shares were in an unlisted company, the claimed exemption was not established, the return omitted taxable income while seeking a refund, and the income surfaced only on scrutiny. The conduct was therefore treated as furnishing inaccurate particulars with intent to evade tax, and the appeal was dismissed.
Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was sustained because the assessee's non-disclosure of capital gains was found to be neither bona fide nor based on a plausible exemption claim. The Court held that the relevant test is whether the omission to disclose taxable income was a genuine mistake or was intended to avoid tax. On the facts, the shares were in an unlisted company, the claimed exemption was not established, the return omitted taxable income while seeking a refund, and the income surfaced only on scrutiny. The conduct was therefore treated as furnishing inaccurate particulars with intent to evade tax, and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
