Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.41 seconds)

Atul Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs The Dy.Cit (Osd), Range-1,, Ahmedabad on 12 July, 2022

"4.2 The reasons mentioned by the Ld. TPO have carefully examined in view of the provisions of section 271G of the I.T. Act. The penalty u/s.271G is levied if any person who entered into international transaction or specified domestic transaction failed to furnish any such information or document as required by sub-section 3 of section 92D of the I.T. Act. The Ld. TPO has not specified in ITA No.1774/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) DCIT vs. Atul Limited Page 6 of 11 her show cause notice es to which information and documents required were not furnished by the appellant during the TP audit. The allegation of the Ld. TPO that the appellant did not comply with the notice u/s. 92D(3) dated 06.09.2018 within the prescribed time is not factually correct and part submission was made on due date of compliance.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1