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...
Assessee failed to declare Long Term Capital Loss (LTCL) on sale of shares of ECL and Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of Saya in the return of income. ECL and Saya appear to be penny stock companies. Assessee seemingly dealt in shares of these companies but did not reflect profits/losses correctly in the return. Assessing Officer (AO) failed to inquire into this aspect during assessment proceedings. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in directing AO to assess income u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE, binding AO without independent application of mind. Assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interest as AO did not examine treatment of LTCL and LTCG. AO directed to carry out de-novo assessment as per law after giving assessee opportunity of hearing. Decided against assessee by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
Assessee failed to declare Long Term Capital Loss (LTCL) on sale of shares of ECL and Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG) on sale of shares of Saya in the return of income. ECL and Saya appear to be penny stock companies. Assessee seemingly dealt in shares of these companies but did not reflect profits/losses correctly in the return. Assessing Officer (AO) failed to inquire into this aspect during assessment proceedings. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) erred in directing AO to assess income u/s 69A read with Section 115BBE, binding AO without independent application of mind. Assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interest as AO did not examine treatment of LTCL and LTCG. AO directed to carry out de-novo assessment as per law after giving assessee opportunity of hearing. Decided against assessee by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
