Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
541 to 560 of 95832 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Under the unamended valuation provision, reference to the...
Prospective valuation amendment limits reassessment: unamended fair market value reference could not justify reopening based on a registered valuer's report.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Under the unamended valuation provision, reference to the Valuation Officer was permissible only where the assessee's registered valuer's estimate was, in the Assessing Officer's opinion, less than fair market value; where the assessee's adopted value was higher than the AO's figure, the clause did not apply and the residuary limb could not be used. The Finance Act, 2012 amendment expanding the wording to cases where value is "at variance" with fair market value was held prospective and inapplicable to the relevant assessment year. On that basis, the reassessment founded on the impermissible valuation reference was unsustainable and the reopening notice was quashed.
Under the unamended valuation provision, reference to the Valuation Officer was permissible only where the assessee's registered valuer's estimate was, in the Assessing Officer's opinion, less than fair market value; where the assessee's adopted value was higher than the AO's figure, the clause did not apply and the residuary limb could not be used. The Finance Act, 2012 amendment expanding the wording to cases where value is "at variance" with fair market value was held prospective and inapplicable to the relevant assessment year. On that basis, the reassessment founded on the impermissible valuation reference was unsustainable and the reopening notice was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.