Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Revision u/s 263 - Deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) with respect to write off of interest - CIT could not invoke jurisdiction u/s 263 as the view taken by the AO was a possible/plausible view. It was only if the AO had not made any enquiry then it could be said that the order passed was erroneous. This is not a case of lack of enquiry though it may be a case of inadequate enquiry. Inadequacy of enquiry as elucidated above does not give jurisdiction to the CIT to invoke provisions of Section 263 prior to the insertion of Explanation 2. - HC
Revision u/s 263 - Deduction u/s 36(1)(vii) with respect to write off of interest - CIT could not invoke jurisdiction u/s 263 as the view taken by the AO was a possible/plausible view. It was only if the AO had not made any enquiry then it could be said that the order passed was erroneous. This is not a case of lack of enquiry though it may be a case of inadequate enquiry. Inadequacy of enquiry as elucidated above does not give jurisdiction to the CIT to invoke provisions of Section 263 prior to the insertion of Explanation 2. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.