Timing mismatch in income recognition requires verification whether receipts were already taxed in an earlier year; matter remitted for fresh examinat...
FOB transaction value and export incentives: customs valuation cannot override contractual export benefits or support confiscation without valid proof...
Page of 4824
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4781 to 4800 of 96463 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of the reopening of assessment u/s 147 beyond four years. The assessment was based on notes to accounts for AY 2009-10. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had fully disclosed details during the original assessment u/s 143(3), and the assessing officer verified these details. The Tribunal emphasized that for reopening after four years, there must be a failure to disclose all material facts. The Supreme Court held that the AO can reassess based on new material only. In this case, the assessing officer made additions based on materials already verified in the original assessment u/s 143(3) without any new basis for reopening. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal.
The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of the reopening of assessment u/s 147 beyond four years. The assessment was based on notes to accounts for AY 2009-10. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had fully disclosed details during the original assessment u/s 143(3), and the assessing officer verified these details. The Tribunal emphasized that for reopening after four years, there must be a failure to disclose all material facts. The Supreme Court held that the AO can reassess based on new material only. In this case, the assessing officer made additions based on materials already verified in the original assessment u/s 143(3) without any new basis for reopening. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.