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...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Assessment u/s 144C - Period of limitation - The Ld. CIT-DR argued that the delay was due to the assessee's failure to participate in the verification process as directed by the DRP. However, the Tribunal noted that sub-section (8) of section 144C precludes the DRP from setting aside any proposed variation or issuing any direction for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. The AO was mandated to complete the assessment within the specified time limit without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - The Tribunal concluded that the final assessment order passed by the AO was barred by limitation and, therefore, null in the eyes of law.
Assessment u/s 144C - Period of limitation - The Ld. CIT-DR argued that the delay was due to the assessee's failure to participate in the verification process as directed by the DRP. However, the Tribunal noted that sub-section (8) of section 144C precludes the DRP from setting aside any proposed variation or issuing any direction for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. The AO was mandated to complete the assessment within the specified time limit without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - The Tribunal concluded that the final assessment order passed by the AO was barred by limitation and, therefore, null in the eyes of law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
