Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A typographical error in the appellate directions led the Assessing Officer to retain part of a section 69 addition for unexplained investment, even though the draft assessment order had made a combined addition for time deposits and reportable transactions. The Tribunal read the reasoning in the directions as showing that both underlying components were meant to be deleted, and treated the differing aggregate figure as a clerical mistake. On that basis, no balance addition could survive in the final assessment order, and the retained amount was deleted.
A typographical error in the appellate directions led the Assessing Officer to retain part of a section 69 addition for unexplained investment, even though the draft assessment order had made a combined addition for time deposits and reportable transactions. The Tribunal read the reasoning in the directions as showing that both underlying components were meant to be deleted, and treated the differing aggregate figure as a clerical mistake. On that basis, no balance addition could survive in the final assessment order, and the retained amount was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
