Trademark depreciation and section 14A adjustments: ITAT applies consistency, independent book-profit computation, and no disallowance without exempt ...
Rebuttable search presumptions and corroboration standards shaped deletion of unsubstantiated additions, while rental income and limited profit estima...
Penalty under section 271D could not be sustained because no satisfaction was recorded in the assessment order initiating penalty proceedings. The Tribunal held that where the returned income was accepted and no quantum addition was made, there was no occasion in the assessment order to record the requisite satisfaction, and the Assessing Officer could not validly proceed by issuing a separate show-cause notice and penalty order. Relying on binding precedent, the Tribunal treated the absence of recorded satisfaction as fatal to jurisdiction and allowed the assessee's appeal without examining the merits.
Penalty under section 271D could not be sustained because no satisfaction was recorded in the assessment order initiating penalty proceedings. The Tribunal held that where the returned income was accepted and no quantum addition was made, there was no occasion in the assessment order to record the requisite satisfaction, and the Assessing Officer could not validly proceed by issuing a separate show-cause notice and penalty order. Relying on binding precedent, the Tribunal treated the absence of recorded satisfaction as fatal to jurisdiction and allowed the assessee's appeal without examining the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.