Alternative statutory remedy under GST bars writ challenge where classification, notice variance, and hearing disputes require factual appellate revie...
Duplicate PAN cancellation timeframe requires prior administrative representation before judicial intervention, ensuring a time-bound decision on the ...
Natural justice and pre-CIRP labour awards protect termination compensation, permitting withdrawal of court deposits despite later insolvency resoluti...
Arbitration of SEZ sub-lease monetary claims preserves rent, maintenance, termination, improvements and damages disputes while unused premises are vac...
Scientific research approval grants a research association tax recognition, subject to annual donor reporting, certification, and regulatory complianc...
Page of 4915
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 98300 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An appellate authority cannot, after finding the...
Gross-profit additions on disputed purchases require reasoned appellate determination; disclosed claims alone do not support inaccurate-particulars penalties.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
An appellate authority cannot, after finding the unexplained-expenditure provision inapplicable, delegate determination of the gross-profit rate and consequential addition to the Assessing Officer. Any gross-profit addition must rest on a reasoned determination and cannot be mechanically applied to disputed purchases that include capitalised items without examining genuine comparables, alleged inflation, and differential margins; fresh speaking adjudication is required. Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars does not arise merely because a disclosed bad-debt write-off or unpaid-interest claim is disallowed. Where audited accounts, ledgers, liability, and payment details were disclosed, and no falsity, fabrication, suppression, or deliberate inaccuracy was established, penalty is deleted despite a tax-audit reporting error. Recorded assessment satisfaction can validate penalty initiation despite a common notice.
An appellate authority cannot, after finding the unexplained-expenditure provision inapplicable, delegate determination of the gross-profit rate and consequential addition to the Assessing Officer. Any gross-profit addition must rest on a reasoned determination and cannot be mechanically applied to disputed purchases that include capitalised items without examining genuine comparables, alleged inflation, and differential margins; fresh speaking adjudication is required. Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars does not arise merely because a disclosed bad-debt write-off or unpaid-interest claim is disallowed. Where audited accounts, ledgers, liability, and payment details were disclosed, and no falsity, fabrication, suppression, or deliberate inaccuracy was established, penalty is deleted despite a tax-audit reporting error. Recorded assessment satisfaction can validate penalty initiation despite a common notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.