Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 96177 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 assessment order passed u/s 144C - The ITAT held that the order issued by the AO was a final assessment order disguised as a draft, violating section 144C of the Act. This section mandates that a draft order must be issued first, allowing the assessee to file objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) before finalizing the assessment. The inclusion of penalty notices and demand under section 156 alongside the draft/final order further supported the Tribunal's conclusion that the order was final. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal by the assessee was to be allowed and the orders by the lower authorities were declared non est (non-existent for legal purposes).
Validity of assessment order passed u/s 144C - The ITAT held that the order issued by the AO was a final assessment order disguised as a draft, violating section 144C of the Act. This section mandates that a draft order must be issued first, allowing the assessee to file objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) before finalizing the assessment. The inclusion of penalty notices and demand under section 156 alongside the draft/final order further supported the Tribunal's conclusion that the order was final. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal by the assessee was to be allowed and the orders by the lower authorities were declared non est (non-existent for legal purposes).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.