Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Delhi held that the assessment u/s 144C(13) was time-barred, questioning the legality of the final assessment order. Referring to the case of GS Chatha Rice Mills, the crucial fact for the appeal was the date of uploading the DRP order onto the ITBA portal, which was unambiguously shown as 27th April 2022 in the intimation letter. All other submissions by the Respondents were considered, but the date of uploading the DRP order was deemed critical. As per section 144C(13), the assessment had to be completed by 31st May 2022, but in this case, it was finalized on 30th June 2022, making it time-barred and null. Consequently, the impugned assessment order dated 30th June 2022 was set aside as being barred by limitation, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Delhi held that the assessment u/s 144C(13) was time-barred, questioning the legality of the final assessment order. Referring to the case of GS Chatha Rice Mills, the crucial fact for the appeal was the date of uploading the DRP order onto the ITBA portal, which was unambiguously shown as 27th April 2022 in the intimation letter. All other submissions by the Respondents were considered, but the date of uploading the DRP order was deemed critical. As per section 144C(13), the assessment had to be completed by 31st May 2022, but in this case, it was finalized on 30th June 2022, making it time-barred and null. Consequently, the impugned assessment order dated 30th June 2022 was set aside as being barred by limitation, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
