Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Revision u/s 263 - Bogus expenditure towards sub-contract payments made to persons who were previously employed in the assessee’s company as supervisors / garage in-charge for monthly salaries - The Tribunal observed that the AO did not examine payments to subcontractors during assessment proceedings. - The details of sub-contracts were not verified, and claims by the assessee were accepted without inquiry. - The ITAT found the AO's actions to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. - Hence, the proceedings under section 263 were rightly initiated.
Revision u/s 263 - Bogus expenditure towards sub-contract payments made to persons who were previously employed in the assessee’s company as supervisors / garage in-charge for monthly salaries - The Tribunal observed that the AO did not examine payments to subcontractors during assessment proceedings. - The details of sub-contracts were not verified, and claims by the assessee were accepted without inquiry. - The ITAT found the AO's actions to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. - Hence, the proceedings under section 263 were rightly initiated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
