Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Clause 10(e) of the CBDT circular on low-tax-effect appeals was construed as an exception covering enforcement agencies akin to CBI, ED, DRI, SFIO and DGGI, rather than those names alone. On that interpretation, the VAT department was treated as falling within the exception because it functioned as an enforcement agency. The Tribunal therefore misread the circular by excluding VAT merely because it was not expressly named. The order rejecting the Revenue's rectification application was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Tribunal for decision on merits after hearing both sides.
Clause 10(e) of the CBDT circular on low-tax-effect appeals was construed as an exception covering enforcement agencies akin to CBI, ED, DRI, SFIO and DGGI, rather than those names alone. On that interpretation, the VAT department was treated as falling within the exception because it functioned as an enforcement agency. The Tribunal therefore misread the circular by excluding VAT merely because it was not expressly named. The order rejecting the Revenue's rectification application was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Tribunal for decision on merits after hearing both sides.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
