Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The expenditure towards environmental compensation was debated as penal or compensatory in nature. The adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) was challenged. It was held that such a question cannot fall within the ambit of Section 143(1), where only arithmetical mistakes and incorrect claim adjustments are to be examined by software during return processing. If the assessment was scrutinized and the Assessing Officer confronted the assessee, the issue could have been decided differently. However, in a Section 143(1) proceeding, such disallowance cannot be made without examining the Pollution Control Board's order directing the payment. Every payment by the assessee would not be penal, therefore, the disallowance was unsustainable. The ground of appeal was allowed, and the disallowance was deleted.
The expenditure towards environmental compensation was debated as penal or compensatory in nature. The adjustment u/s 143(1)(a) was challenged. It was held that such a question cannot fall within the ambit of Section 143(1), where only arithmetical mistakes and incorrect claim adjustments are to be examined by software during return processing. If the assessment was scrutinized and the Assessing Officer confronted the assessee, the issue could have been decided differently. However, in a Section 143(1) proceeding, such disallowance cannot be made without examining the Pollution Control Board's order directing the payment. Every payment by the assessee would not be penal, therefore, the disallowance was unsustainable. The ground of appeal was allowed, and the disallowance was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.