Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Page of 4790
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95794 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the Assessing Officer (AO) erred in denying the assessee's request for rectification u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act and allowing credit for the difference in Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) for the assessment year 2019-20. The AO had initially restricted TDS based on Rule 37BA but later rectified the mistake u/s 154, allowing credit for the difference. However, the AO subsequently issued a letter denying the rectification without giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard, which is a mandatory requirement u/s 154(3). The ITAT set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and directed the AO to give effect to the earlier rectification order allowing credit for the difference in TDS.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) held that the Assessing Officer (AO) erred in denying the assessee's request for rectification u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act and allowing credit for the difference in Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) for the assessment year 2019-20. The AO had initially restricted TDS based on Rule 37BA but later rectified the mistake u/s 154, allowing credit for the difference. However, the AO subsequently issued a letter denying the rectification without giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard, which is a mandatory requirement u/s 154(3). The ITAT set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and directed the AO to give effect to the earlier rectification order allowing credit for the difference in TDS.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
