Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty under section 271AAC was upheld because the Tribunal found that the quantum addition for unexplained investment had already been conclusively sustained on incriminating digital material and could not be reopened in penalty proceedings. It held that section 271AAC applies where income is determined under section 115BBE, and the statutory immunity is unavailable unless the income is disclosed in the return and tax is paid within the prescribed time, which was not done. The Tribunal further held that the word "may" requires judicial discretion, but where unexplained investment is established and no bona fide explanation or reasonable cause is shown, penalty follows as the natural legal consequence.
Penalty under section 271AAC was upheld because the Tribunal found that the quantum addition for unexplained investment had already been conclusively sustained on incriminating digital material and could not be reopened in penalty proceedings. It held that section 271AAC applies where income is determined under section 115BBE, and the statutory immunity is unavailable unless the income is disclosed in the return and tax is paid within the prescribed time, which was not done. The Tribunal further held that the word "may" requires judicial discretion, but where unexplained investment is established and no bona fide explanation or reasonable cause is shown, penalty follows as the natural legal consequence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
