Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
801 to 820 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reopening of assessment - reason to believe or reason to suspect - The ITAT examined the "reasons recorded" by the AO for reopening the assessment. It noted that the AO relied on the information provided by the SEBI order, which alleged manipulative trading practices by certain entities, including the director of the assessee company. However, the court observed that the name of the assessee company itself was not listed among the entities restrained by SEBI. - The Tribunal emphasized that for the reopening of an assessment, the AO must have "reasons to believe" that income has escaped assessment, not merely "reasons to suspect." It found that the information provided by the SEBI order could only trigger "reasons to suspect" and did not meet the legal requirement for reopening.
Reopening of assessment - reason to believe or reason to suspect - The ITAT examined the "reasons recorded" by the AO for reopening the assessment. It noted that the AO relied on the information provided by the SEBI order, which alleged manipulative trading practices by certain entities, including the director of the assessee company. However, the court observed that the name of the assessee company itself was not listed among the entities restrained by SEBI. - The Tribunal emphasized that for the reopening of an assessment, the AO must have "reasons to believe" that income has escaped assessment, not merely "reasons to suspect." It found that the information provided by the SEBI order could only trigger "reasons to suspect" and did not meet the legal requirement for reopening.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
