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...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
201 to 220 of 97809 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 - error noted by the CIT that sale of properties by the assessee during the year was not examined by the AO vis-à-vis its stamp duty value for the purpose of invoking section 43CA - The appellant challenges the validity of the PCIT's directions, particularly regarding property transactions and stamp duty valuations under section 43CA. The ITAT ultimately rules in favor of the appellant, finding no error in the AO's assessment order and determining that the PCIT's directions were beyond the scope of revenue authorities' powers. Additionally, it clarifies the limited role of revenue authorities in questioning stamp duty valuations under section 43CA.
Revision u/s 263 - error noted by the CIT that sale of properties by the assessee during the year was not examined by the AO vis-à-vis its stamp duty value for the purpose of invoking section 43CA - The appellant challenges the validity of the PCIT's directions, particularly regarding property transactions and stamp duty valuations under section 43CA. The ITAT ultimately rules in favor of the appellant, finding no error in the AO's assessment order and determining that the PCIT's directions were beyond the scope of revenue authorities' powers. Additionally, it clarifies the limited role of revenue authorities in questioning stamp duty valuations under section 43CA.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.