Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
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 The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before.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 The Court noted that the approval to hold the fund was withdrawn only from the date of the order, not before.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.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
