Tag: Prosecution u/s 276B
No penalty u/s 271C on mere delay in deposit of TDS after deduction – Supreme Court No penalty can be levied u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act 1961 on mere delay in deposit of TDS after its deduction – Supreme Court In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble …
Prosecution for late deposit of TDS after 11 months. Once there was a non-deposit, necessary consequences shall follow including prosecution- Supreme Court ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3564 (2021) (12) SC In the instant case, the assessee had wiled a Writ Petition to challenge the sanction letter for prosecution …
Prosecution u/s 276B set aside as intention of company was to deposit TDS, but due to bad financial condition the same was not deposited in time but later on In a recent judgment, The Session Judge set aside the prosecution u/s 276B and sentence of Rs. 25 lakhs …
Rigorous imprisonment awarded u/s 276B for delayed late deposit of TDS. Assessee had culpable mental state as he remained absent before the authorities and also not filed application for compounding ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2984 (2019) (06) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties:Gopal Engineering V/s …
Prosecution 276C(2) – Evasion of tax vs evasion of payment of tax. High Court quashed prosecution when ITAT reduced income and there was no indifference on the part of assessee to pay demanded tax ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 2677 (2018) (12) HC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:Commissioner of …
High Court declines to quash criminal proceedings u/s 276B for alleged non deposit of TDS, grants liberty to move discharge application before CJM Court ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2626 (2018) (11) HC An application was moved before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the …
Release of convicts prosecuted under Income Tax Act on probation- Special Judge dismiss Revenue’s appeal delay condonation application for casual approach ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2574 (2018) (10) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: Mohd. Hasim Vs State of UP State of Nagaland Vs.Lipok …
Prosecution under section 276B – Name appearing in Traces module would not make accountant a director or principal officer u/s 2 (35) of Income Tax Act. To invoke Section 276B mere fact that accused was working in accounts department would not mean that he automatically becomes person liable …
Prosecution against accountant u/s 276 B for delay in deposit of TDS quashed. The Court asked why instead of treating directors as principal officers the Income Tax Department was hell-bent in prosecuting its small-time employee. The Court warned the ITO that false deposition can make him face criminal …
Prosecution u/s 276B of directors as Principal Officer upheld as they failed to disclose who was managing the affairs of the company ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2282 (2018) (04) TC The instant judgment was made in a revision petition filed by the defaulting company and its principal …
