Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4883
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97649 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of reopening of assessment questioned due to errors in original notice. Notice alleged non-filing of return, later contradicted. AO failed to evaluate return before alleging income escape. AO's opinion on income taxation not based on due process. DTAA benefits not part of original notice. Final order relied on assessment from prior year. Allotment of shares under scheme not considered. Reassessment reasons must be consistent. Petitioner refuted remittances, claimed DTAA exemption. AO's denial of treaty benefits without original basis not valid. Court ruled in favor of assessee, criticizing AO's inconsistent approach.
Validity of reopening of assessment questioned due to errors in original notice. Notice alleged non-filing of return, later contradicted. AO failed to evaluate return before alleging income escape. AO's opinion on income taxation not based on due process. DTAA benefits not part of original notice. Final order relied on assessment from prior year. Allotment of shares under scheme not considered. Reassessment reasons must be consistent. Petitioner refuted remittances, claimed DTAA exemption. AO's denial of treaty benefits without original basis not valid. Court ruled in favor of assessee, criticizing AO's inconsistent approach.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
