Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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 
