Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A CBDT-prescribed format defect in notice under section 143(2) was held to be only a technical irregularity and not, by itself, a ground to invalidate the assessment. The rejection of books under section 145(3) was found unjustified because specific reasons for such rejection were not properly established, although the cash-book discrepancies could still be examined for a separate addition under section 69A. On the cash-deposit issue, the matter was remanded for de novo assessment so the assessee could produce supporting evidence and the Assessing Officer could decide the source of deposits afresh after affording effective hearing.
A CBDT-prescribed format defect in notice under section 143(2) was held to be only a technical irregularity and not, by itself, a ground to invalidate the assessment. The rejection of books under section 145(3) was found unjustified because specific reasons for such rejection were not properly established, although the cash-book discrepancies could still be examined for a separate addition under section 69A. On the cash-deposit issue, the matter was remanded for de novo assessment so the assessee could produce supporting evidence and the Assessing Officer could decide the source of deposits afresh after affording effective hearing.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
