S. 276C: Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Compounding of offence-False verification-High Court holding assessee entitled to composition and directing the Department to compound offences-A compounding application under section 279(2) which was rejected by competent authority and thereafter, despite final directions of High Court, he was asked to pay compounding charges determined in accordance with revised Compounding Guidelines dated 17-10-2024, such demand was unsustainable and compounding fee was liable to be recomputed under CBDT Guidelines dated 16-5-2008.[S. 276C, 277, 279(1A), 279(2),279(6), Art. 226]

S. 276C: Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Contempt of court-Compounding of offences-Jurisdiction of court-Court cannot, in contempt jurisdiction, water down or dilute order of court by issuing fresh directions.-Single judge conclusively holding assessee entitled to compound offence and that decision of Supreme Court applicable to assessee-Department not appealing against order of single judge-Pursuant thereto Department again rejecting application for composition and single judge on assessee’s writ petition directing Department to compound Appeal to Division Bench-Assessee entitled to compound offence final in first round of litigation and Department not entitled to contend against it Bench will not consider question of assessee’s right to compound or applicability of circulars-Order of single judge affirmed.[S. 273A, 276C, 277, 279(1A), 279(2),Art. 226]

S. 276C: Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Contempt of court-Compounding of offences-False verification-High Court dismissing assessee’s petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings-Appeal disposed of on basis of order arising out of assessee’s application for compounding offences, directing that if assessee paid compounding fee within time stipulated in order, trial court shall compound offences.[S. 273A, 276C, 277, 279(1A),279 (2), Art. 136]

S. 276C: Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Contempt of court-Compounding of offences-False verification-High Court holding assessee entitled to composition and directing Department to compound offences-SLP of revenue dismissed-Questions of law open.[S. 273A, 276C, 277, 279(1A), 279 (2), Art. 136]

S. 197 : Deduction at source-Certificate for lower rate-High Court setting aside orders stipulating deduction at higher rate and certificate for lower deduction of tax at source issued for earlier assessment years-Notice to be issued eliciting assessee’s response when assessee unable to satisfy Department that permanent establishment not in existence-Only then, Department shall issue certificate of higher tax rate.[Art. 226]

S. 194A: Deduction at source-Interest other than interest on securities-Co-operative society-Constitutional validity-Deduction of tax at source-Provision making it obligatory for co-operative societies to deduct tax on payments of interest where total sales, gross receipts or turnover of assessee exceeds Rs. 50 crores-Provision valid-Interpretation of taxing statutes-Proviso-Statutory stipulation in the form of a proviso. Proviso introduced, bringing in conditions restricting operation of main provision. Permissible-hardships or inconvenience of the party subjected to law, by itself not a ground for judicial interference.[S.194A(3)(iii), Banking Regulation Act, 1949, S. 5(b), Art. 14, 226]

S. 172: Shipping business-Non-residents-Certificate issued by Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore stating that income derived from operation of ships in international traffic at Indian port would be governed by article 8 and not article 24 and was taxable in Singapore-Contents of certificate considered by court in earlier decision-Held, in absence of any other material on record to demonstrate veracity of certificate was doubtful Tribunal could not have restored matter to Assessing Officer merely on suspicion and doubts contrary to findings arrived at by this court in earlier decision-Assessment order passed consequent to remand quashed and set aside-DTAA-India-Singapore [S. 172(2),260A, Art, 8,24]

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Acquisition of foreign assets-Disclosed in returns filed and reflected in books of account for relevant assessment year-Return filed under section 153A disclosing acquisition of assets before notice for penalty issued-There was no failure to disclose-No penalty warranted-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A]

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Approval of prescribed authority-Approvals in 30 cases rushed through on same day Difficult to believe that Additional Commissioner considered all proposals and accompanying draft assessment orders within a few minutes or even a couple of hours-Approval need not resemble reasoned decision-But should reflect minimal application of mind-Absence of valid and prior approval vitiates assessment-Non-application of mind-Tribunal right in quashing assessments-Order of Tribunal affirmed-No substantial question of law. [S. 132,153D, 260A]

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-Recording of satisfaction note by Assessing Officer of person in respect of whom search conducted Mandatory-Settlement commission-Admission-In absence thereof, jurisdictional Assessing Officer of “other person” cannot assume jurisdiction solely on basis of material sent to him by Assessing Officer of searched person-Reassessment-Assessment of third person-Non obstante provisions-Assessing Officer cannot directly invoke sections 147 and 148 merely because numerous assessees’ names have been unearthed during search and whom it believes have evaded tax-Reassessment under general provisions permissible on basis of material collected post-search from any other independent source-Information regarding payment of cash received post-search on basis of admission before Settlement Commission Information sufficient to reopen the assessment-to trigger action under sections 147 and 148-Held, Department was justified in reopening assessment on information received subsequently-Assessment of third person-No satisfaction note recorded by Assessing Officer of entity subjected to search-Material merely supplied to jurisdictional Assessing Office of “other person”-Not sufficient-What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly-Circular No. 24 of 2015 dated 31-12-2015(2016) 380 ITR 32 (St). [S. 147, 148, 153C, 245C, 245D 260A]