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" ?
The ITAT Delhi addressed two key issues. Firstly, on disallowance of provision for leave encashment, the AO rejected the claim as it was not made through a revised return. The Tribunal held that deduction can only be allowed when actual payment is made u/s 43B(f) of the Act, citing a Supreme Court ruling. AO directed to verify actual payment date. Secondly, on taxability of excise duty subsidy, the Tribunal ruled it as capital receipt based on earlier decisions, holding it non-taxable. Additional ground raised by the assessee was allowed.
The ITAT Delhi addressed two key issues. Firstly, on disallowance of provision for leave encashment, the AO rejected the claim as it was not made through a revised return. The Tribunal held that deduction can only be allowed when actual payment is made u/s 43B(f) of the Act, citing a Supreme Court ruling. AO directed to verify actual payment date. Secondly, on taxability of excise duty subsidy, the Tribunal ruled it as capital receipt based on earlier decisions, holding it non-taxable. Additional ground raised by the assessee was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
