Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
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...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of re-opening of assessment u/s 147 - Procedure of recording satisfaction for reopening assessment - notice beyond period of four years - The ITAT observed that, in the income tax return assessee has disclosed long term capital gain, but AO in the reasons recorded has mentioned short term capital gain/loss which means that he was not sure of the transactions for which the reopening is carried out. Further, AO has mentioned the figure as long term capital gain/short term capital loss. This observation is also factually incorrect. - The ITAT held that the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to non-compliance with procedural requirements and lack of independent application of mind by the AO.
Validity of re-opening of assessment u/s 147 - Procedure of recording satisfaction for reopening assessment - notice beyond period of four years - The ITAT observed that, in the income tax return assessee has disclosed long term capital gain, but AO in the reasons recorded has mentioned short term capital gain/loss which means that he was not sure of the transactions for which the reopening is carried out. Further, AO has mentioned the figure as long term capital gain/short term capital loss. This observation is also factually incorrect. - The ITAT held that the re-opening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to non-compliance with procedural requirements and lack of independent application of mind by the AO.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
