https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394465 The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a compounding application under Section 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner faced penalties for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars after engaging in a sham transaction. The rejection was upheld based on guidelines categorizing the offense as major fraud, with conclusive findings by authorities affirming the fraudulent nature and substantial misrepresentation involved. The petitioner's defense was deemed insufficient, leading to the dismissal of their plea for compounding. en-us Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394465 The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the rejection of a compounding application under Section 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioner faced penalties for concealment of income and furnishing inaccurate particulars after engaging in a sham transaction. The rejection was upheld based on guidelines categorizing the offense as major fraud, with conclusive findings by authorities affirming the fraudulent nature and substantial misrepresentation involved. The petitioner's defense was deemed insufficient, leading to the dismissal of their plea for compounding. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394465