Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Dispute concerned computation of interest in the intimation issued under s. 143(1), not the leviability of interest itself. The ITAT noted that interest under ss. 234A and 234C was not in dispute, but the assessee challenged the higher amounts computed in the intimation. Because the working for the enhanced figure, especially for s. 234C, was not on record and the balance had to be examined against advance tax paid, the matter required factual verification. The computation under ss. 234A, 234B and 234C was restored to the AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law.
Dispute concerned computation of interest in the intimation issued under s. 143(1), not the leviability of interest itself. The ITAT noted that interest under ss. 234A and 234C was not in dispute, but the assessee challenged the higher amounts computed in the intimation. Because the working for the enhanced figure, especially for s. 234C, was not on record and the balance had to be examined against advance tax paid, the matter required factual verification. The computation under ss. 234A, 234B and 234C was restored to the AO for de novo adjudication in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.