Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
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...
The ITAT considered an appeal challenging an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) regarding addition u/s 69A for cash deposits. The Revenue argued denial of natural justice as the CIT(A) did not remind the Assessing Officer to submit a remand report, violating principles of natural justice. Referring to legal precedents, the ITAT emphasized the importance of providing sufficient opportunity for all parties involved. It noted that justice must not only be done but seen to be done. As a result, the ITAT allowed the appeals, directing the matters to be sent back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication to ensure fairness in the process.
The ITAT considered an appeal challenging an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) regarding addition u/s 69A for cash deposits. The Revenue argued denial of natural justice as the CIT(A) did not remind the Assessing Officer to submit a remand report, violating principles of natural justice. Referring to legal precedents, the ITAT emphasized the importance of providing sufficient opportunity for all parties involved. It noted that justice must not only be done but seen to be done. As a result, the ITAT allowed the appeals, directing the matters to be sent back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication to ensure fairness in the process.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
