Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Penalty under section 271C was held unsustainable where the order was passed beyond the six-month limit prescribed by section 275(1)(c), as fiscal limitation provisions must be strictly applied and penalty cannot be imposed after expiry of that period. The tribunal also noted that the alleged default arose from a disallowance treated as interest-related expenditure, yet the reference for penalty was made after an inordinate 18-month delay. That delay was found to defeat the object of section 275(1)(c), and the penalty order, as well as the appellate affirmation, was set aside and the penalty deleted.
Penalty under section 271C was held unsustainable where the order was passed beyond the six-month limit prescribed by section 275(1)(c), as fiscal limitation provisions must be strictly applied and penalty cannot be imposed after expiry of that period. The tribunal also noted that the alleged default arose from a disallowance treated as interest-related expenditure, yet the reference for penalty was made after an inordinate 18-month delay. That delay was found to defeat the object of section 275(1)(c), and the penalty order, as well as the appellate affirmation, was set aside and the penalty deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
