Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3001 to 3020 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Non-compliance with notices under section 142(1) did not justify penalty under section 272A(1)(d) where the assessee later furnished detailed replies with supporting material, the Assessing Officer verified and accepted that material, and the assessment was completed under section 143(3). The Tribunal treated the earlier default as merged in the subsequent compliance and as deemed condoned by the regular assessment, so the penalty was held not leviable and was deleted in the lead matter and connected appeals.
Non-compliance with notices under section 142(1) did not justify penalty under section 272A(1)(d) where the assessee later furnished detailed replies with supporting material, the Assessing Officer verified and accepted that material, and the assessment was completed under section 143(3). The Tribunal treated the earlier default as merged in the subsequent compliance and as deemed condoned by the regular assessment, so the penalty was held not leviable and was deleted in the lead matter and connected appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.