Donor-directed corpus contributions retain capital character despite exemption claims under section 10(23C)(vi), preventing their treatment as taxable...
Enhanced tax-audit threshold applies where banking records establish compliant non-cash receipts and payments, eliminating penalty exposure for audit ...
Transfer pricing consistency protects identical non-interest-bearing debenture terms from a later notional-interest adjustment without valid statutory...
Rectification of debatable deduction claims cannot reverse scrutiny-approved co-operative society interest income deductions as apparent record errors...
Cash-method accounting bars presumptive interest taxation, while unsupported securities and share-trading additions require reliable material and veri...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An assessment order under the GST regime was held vitiated because it did not bear a Document Identification Number, following the Court's earlier view that absence of a DIN invalidates the order. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment after hearing the taxpayer. On the delayed writ challenge and disputed portal service, the Court did not finally resolve the service controversy but held that petitions attacking assessment orders with patent irregularities could be entertained on terms. Relief was made conditional on deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with the period of writ pendency excluded for limitation and liberty preserved to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.
An assessment order under the GST regime was held vitiated because it did not bear a Document Identification Number, following the Court's earlier view that absence of a DIN invalidates the order. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment after hearing the taxpayer. On the delayed writ challenge and disputed portal service, the Court did not finally resolve the service controversy but held that petitions attacking assessment orders with patent irregularities could be entertained on terms. Relief was made conditional on deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with the period of writ pendency excluded for limitation and liberty preserved to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.