Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2121 to 2140 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
In the case before ITAT Delhi, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the assessment made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. The additions included depletion in the value of investment, writing off of debit balance, disallowance under section 40(a), and treatment of unsecured loans. The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide any material contradicting the AO's findings. The auditor of the assessee also acknowledged the capital nature of the investment depletion, debit balance, and disallowances. Due to the lack of evidence and failure to confirm unsecured loans, the Tribunal affirmed the AO's findings and dismissed the assessee's appeal.
In the case before ITAT Delhi, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the assessment made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. The additions included depletion in the value of investment, writing off of debit balance, disallowance under section 40(a), and treatment of unsecured loans. The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide any material contradicting the AO's findings. The auditor of the assessee also acknowledged the capital nature of the investment depletion, debit balance, and disallowances. Due to the lack of evidence and failure to confirm unsecured loans, the Tribunal affirmed the AO's findings and dismissed the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.