Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
A reassessment order cannot be revised under section 263 merely because the Principal Commissioner believes further inquiry was desirable, where the Assessing Officer had examined the recorded reasons issue, considered contract notes, bank statements, computation and audited accounts, and accepted the assessee's explanation. The Tribunal held that Explanation 2 to section 263 does not apply absent a finding that the reassessment was made without any enquiry or verification. The reassessment was therefore not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, and the revisional jurisdiction was wrongly assumed; the revision order was quashed.
A reassessment order cannot be revised under section 263 merely because the Principal Commissioner believes further inquiry was desirable, where the Assessing Officer had examined the recorded reasons issue, considered contract notes, bank statements, computation and audited accounts, and accepted the assessee's explanation. The Tribunal held that Explanation 2 to section 263 does not apply absent a finding that the reassessment was made without any enquiry or verification. The reassessment was therefore not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, and the revisional jurisdiction was wrongly assumed; the revision order was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
