Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
Revenue-neutral domestic transfer pricing and mirror transactions justified deletion of related-party adjustments for operation, maintenance and port ...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1061 to 1080 of 95833 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.