Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3101 to 3120 of 96176 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court considered the validity of reopening an assessment based on excess funds not being part of an "approved refund" and thus subject to taxation. The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before. The Tribunal found that the withdrawal of approval would only take effect from the date of the order, not earlier. Therefore, the notice issued for reopening the assessment was deemed invalid as the approval was still in effect at the time. The Tribunal rightly set aside the notice and subsequent reassessment order due to the lack of communication regarding the withdrawal of approval by the Commissioner.
The High Court considered the validity of reopening an assessment based on excess funds not being part of an "approved refund" and thus subject to taxation. The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before. The Tribunal found that the withdrawal of approval would only take effect from the date of the order, not earlier. Therefore, the notice issued for reopening the assessment was deemed invalid as the approval was still in effect at the time. The Tribunal rightly set aside the notice and subsequent reassessment order due to the lack of communication regarding the withdrawal of approval by the Commissioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.