Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving revision u/s 263 of the Act related to annuity payments made to LIC. The employer did not make the annuity payment; it was made on employees' request from VRS amount. The claim for exemption u/s 10(10CC) and u/s 10(10BB) was found incorrect as per PCIT's enquiry. AO allowed exemptions without verifying from the employer, leading to an erroneous order. The annuity amount paid to LIC was deemed taxable as salary per Supreme Court ruling. The AO's failure to conduct proper inquiries rendered the order prejudicial to revenue. Jurisdiction u/s 263 was upheld, dismissing the assessee's appeals.
The Appellate Tribunal considered a case involving revision u/s 263 of the Act related to annuity payments made to LIC. The employer did not make the annuity payment; it was made on employees' request from VRS amount. The claim for exemption u/s 10(10CC) and u/s 10(10BB) was found incorrect as per PCIT's enquiry. AO allowed exemptions without verifying from the employer, leading to an erroneous order. The annuity amount paid to LIC was deemed taxable as salary per Supreme Court ruling. The AO's failure to conduct proper inquiries rendered the order prejudicial to revenue. Jurisdiction u/s 263 was upheld, dismissing the assessee's appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.