Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revision u/s 263 - Exemption claimed u/s 80 IB(11- C) - If certain assessment order was made by the Income Tax Officer the same could not be branded as erroneous by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax merely because another view was possible - the Tribunal did not commit any error in holding that such enquiry was made by the Assessing Officer and hence there was no reason for the Pr. CIT to invoke jurisdiction u/s 263. - HC
Revision u/s 263 - Exemption claimed u/s 80 IB(11- C) - If certain assessment order was made by the Income Tax Officer the same could not be branded as erroneous by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax merely because another view was possible - the Tribunal did not commit any error in holding that such enquiry was made by the Assessing Officer and hence there was no reason for the Pr. CIT to invoke jurisdiction u/s 263. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
