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...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
401 to 420 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal held that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was barred by limitation and quashed it. As per Section 144C(13) read with Section 143(3), the Assessing Officer is required to give effect to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) within one month from the end of the month in which such directions are received. In the instant case, the DRP's directions were received by the Assessing Officer on 03/10/2018, and the last date for passing the assessment order was 30/11/2018. However, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on 06/12/2018, which was beyond the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal relied on the decisions in Envestnet Asset Management (India) (P.) Ltd. and Dentsply India (P.) Ltd., where similar assessment orders passed after the expiry of the time limit were set aside. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the assessment orders for the relevant assessment years, being barred by limitation.
The Tribunal held that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer was barred by limitation and quashed it. As per Section 144C(13) read with Section 143(3), the Assessing Officer is required to give effect to the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) within one month from the end of the month in which such directions are received. In the instant case, the DRP's directions were received by the Assessing Officer on 03/10/2018, and the last date for passing the assessment order was 30/11/2018. However, the Assessing Officer passed the assessment order on 06/12/2018, which was beyond the prescribed time limit. The Tribunal relied on the decisions in Envestnet Asset Management (India) (P.) Ltd. and Dentsply India (P.) Ltd., where similar assessment orders passed after the expiry of the time limit were set aside. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the assessment orders for the relevant assessment years, being barred by limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
