Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The assessee claimed excess deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for provision for bad and doubtful debts, leading to escapement of income. The Assessing Officer rightly formed the belief of income escapement based on assessment records obtained from the Income Tax Officer, revealing the excess deduction claim. It was not a case of change of opinion, as the statutory provisions u/s 36(1)(viia) limit the deduction to 7.5% of total income, leaving no room for differing opinions. The tangible material justified reopening the assessment, and the assessee's reliance on the Delta Airlines case was misplaced. The appeal was dismissed, as it was a clear case of income escapement due to excess deduction claimed, contrary to statutory provisions.
The assessee claimed excess deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) for provision for bad and doubtful debts, leading to escapement of income. The Assessing Officer rightly formed the belief of income escapement based on assessment records obtained from the Income Tax Officer, revealing the excess deduction claim. It was not a case of change of opinion, as the statutory provisions u/s 36(1)(viia) limit the deduction to 7.5% of total income, leaving no room for differing opinions. The tangible material justified reopening the assessment, and the assessee's reliance on the Delta Airlines case was misplaced. The appeal was dismissed, as it was a clear case of income escapement due to excess deduction claimed, contrary to statutory provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.