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...
Assessee, a non-resident Indian residing outside India for over 25 years, challenged the jurisdiction of Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 2(2), Ajmer to issue notice u/s 148 for reassessment proceedings. Evidence showed assessee's residential status as NRI on the date of notice issuance. Faceless Assessment Unit also acknowledged the case pertained to a non-resident individual, requiring assessment at the international charge. ITAT held ITO, Ward 2(2), Ajmer lacked jurisdiction when issuing the notice on 30.03.2022, rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid. Additionally, the Assessing Officer erroneously treated the entire sale consideration as Long Term Capital Gain without considering the original cost and evidence provided by the assessee, resulting in a perverse order, which ITAT quashed.
Assessee, a non-resident Indian residing outside India for over 25 years, challenged the jurisdiction of Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 2(2), Ajmer to issue notice u/s 148 for reassessment proceedings. Evidence showed assessee's residential status as NRI on the date of notice issuance. Faceless Assessment Unit also acknowledged the case pertained to a non-resident individual, requiring assessment at the international charge. ITAT held ITO, Ward 2(2), Ajmer lacked jurisdiction when issuing the notice on 30.03.2022, rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid. Additionally, the Assessing Officer erroneously treated the entire sale consideration as Long Term Capital Gain without considering the original cost and evidence provided by the assessee, resulting in a perverse order, which ITAT quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
