Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Rajasthan High Court examined the validity of revision proceedings u/s 263 concerning the period of limitation. The issue was whether the period of limitation for passing the order u/s 263 should be reckoned from the date of the original assessment order or the date of the reassessment order. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Industrial Development Bank of India Ltd. and followed the decision in the case of Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited. It was held that once the reassessment of the escaped assessment occurred, the revision would have the same limited ambit for the purpose of limitation prescribed in Section 263(2) of the Income Tax Act of 1961, which is two years. The Court noted that the petitioner could have challenged the original assessment order but lost due to the law of limitation. Citing the Supreme Court's ruling, the Court found the revision proceedings to be illegal on the face of it due to limitation issues, set them aside.
The Rajasthan High Court examined the validity of revision proceedings u/s 263 concerning the period of limitation. The issue was whether the period of limitation for passing the order u/s 263 should be reckoned from the date of the original assessment order or the date of the reassessment order. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Industrial Development Bank of India Ltd. and followed the decision in the case of Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited. It was held that once the reassessment of the escaped assessment occurred, the revision would have the same limited ambit for the purpose of limitation prescribed in Section 263(2) of the Income Tax Act of 1961, which is two years. The Court noted that the petitioner could have challenged the original assessment order but lost due to the law of limitation. Citing the Supreme Court's ruling, the Court found the revision proceedings to be illegal on the face of it due to limitation issues, set them aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
