Personal liberty safeguards restrict arrest after court-directed GST appearance, requiring interim release where authorities overreach pending proceed...
Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
Unverified Insight Portal Information Cannot Justify Reassessment Without a Verified Taxpayer-Specific Income-Escape Nexus or Demonstrated Application...
Assessing Officer jurisdiction after statutory transfer invalidates reassessment notices issued by transferor officers and nullifies resulting proceed...
Consequential appeal-effect orders must implement rectification deleting working-capital adjustments and reconsider the resulting arm's-length range c...
Discounted cash flow valuation protects share premium where projections are reasonable, while audited book expenses defeat unexplained-expenditure add...
Appellate authorities may entertain a fresh deduction claim even if no revised return was filed, so long as the material needed to examine the claim is already on record; the restriction on fresh claims applies to the Assessing Officer, not to appellate jurisdiction. Here, the assessee had disclosed that commission expenditure was being deferred for claim on payment, and the Assessing Officer did not reject the claim for want of a revised return. After remand, the Assessing Officer was required to verify the quantum and nature of the commission services but failed to do so despite the details being furnished. The Tribunal also relied on acceptance of similar expenditure in other years, and the High Court held that no substantial question of law arose.
Appellate authorities may entertain a fresh deduction claim even if no revised return was filed, so long as the material needed to examine the claim is already on record; the restriction on fresh claims applies to the Assessing Officer, not to appellate jurisdiction. Here, the assessee had disclosed that commission expenditure was being deferred for claim on payment, and the Assessing Officer did not reject the claim for want of a revised return. After remand, the Assessing Officer was required to verify the quantum and nature of the commission services but failed to do so despite the details being furnished. The Tribunal also relied on acceptance of similar expenditure in other years, and the High Court held that no substantial question of law arose.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
