Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Revision under section 263 cannot rest merely on a view that the...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is established.
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
Revision under section 263 cannot rest merely on a view that the Assessing Officer should have conducted a deeper inquiry into share capital received from an existing non-resident shareholder. Where the assessment record shows detailed queries and supporting material on the investor's identity, creditworthiness, remittance and transaction, an assessment order need not expressly record every inquiry to establish application of mind. Revisionary jurisdiction does not permit re-examination where the Assessing Officer adopted a permissible view after inquiry. The revisionary authority must undertake at least minimal independent inquiry and clearly establish that the assessment is both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue; it cannot remand genuineness for fresh determination.
Revision under section 263 cannot rest merely on a view that the Assessing Officer should have conducted a deeper inquiry into share capital received from an existing non-resident shareholder. Where the assessment record shows detailed queries and supporting material on the investor's identity, creditworthiness, remittance and transaction, an assessment order need not expressly record every inquiry to establish application of mind. Revisionary jurisdiction does not permit re-examination where the Assessing Officer adopted a permissible view after inquiry. The revisionary authority must undertake at least minimal independent inquiry and clearly establish that the assessment is both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue; it cannot remand genuineness for fresh determination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.