Section 10A and related deductions: Tribunal rejects separate-undertaking claim, but allows loss set-off, ESOP cost and foreign tax credit in principl...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4201 to 4220 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Draft assessment repeated in the final order without incorporating DRP directions was held invalid, because directions under section 144C bind the Assessing Officer and the final assessment must conform to them. The Tribunal, following Olympus Medical Systems (P) Ltd., treated non-conformity with the DRP procedure as rendering the final assessment order bad in law and liable to be quashed. On that basis, the impugned order was quashed as null and void, and the remaining jurisdictional and merits grounds were left unadjudicated.
Draft assessment repeated in the final order without incorporating DRP directions was held invalid, because directions under section 144C bind the Assessing Officer and the final assessment must conform to them. The Tribunal, following Olympus Medical Systems (P) Ltd., treated non-conformity with the DRP procedure as rendering the final assessment order bad in law and liable to be quashed. On that basis, the impugned order was quashed as null and void, and the remaining jurisdictional and merits grounds were left unadjudicated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.