Prospective valuation amendment limits reassessment: unamended fair market value reference could not justify reopening based on a registered valuer's ...
Exemption for examination-related services rejected where recipients were commercial entities; suppression sustained extended limitation and penalties...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1501 to 1520 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessee filed second rectification application u/s 254, raising same grounds as first miscellaneous application which was already rejected. Tribunal held that except for certain documents, no evidence was available regarding payment of ESI and EPF within due dates as claimed. Second miscellaneous application filed within six months but on same grounds as first, hence not maintainable as per Smt. Vasantben H. Sheth case. Tribunal reiterated that Assessing Officer shall pass consequential order in compliance with Tribunal's order in Manikandan Vazhukkapara Kumaran case. Tribunal cannot entertain second miscellaneous application on same grounds after rejecting first.
Assessee filed second rectification application u/s 254, raising same grounds as first miscellaneous application which was already rejected. Tribunal held that except for certain documents, no evidence was available regarding payment of ESI and EPF within due dates as claimed. Second miscellaneous application filed within six months but on same grounds as first, hence not maintainable as per Smt. Vasantben H. Sheth case. Tribunal reiterated that Assessing Officer shall pass consequential order in compliance with Tribunal's order in Manikandan Vazhukkapara Kumaran case. Tribunal cannot entertain second miscellaneous application on same grounds after rejecting first.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.