Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Revision u/s 263 disallowing exemption u/s 11(1) for government grant received by assessee-Trust. ITAT concluded Principal CIT did not independently apply mind by calling office records, but acted on Assessing Officer's proposal to initiate Section 263 proceedings, rendering order liable to be set aside. ITAT based on consistency principle and absence of change in facts regarding Trust receiving government grant in earlier years accepted by Revenue for Section 11 exemption eligibility. HC found no erroneous or prejudicial assessment order u/s 143(3), dismissing appeal as no substantial question of law arose from ITAT order.
Revision u/s 263 disallowing exemption u/s 11(1) for government grant received by assessee-Trust. ITAT concluded Principal CIT did not independently apply mind by calling office records, but acted on Assessing Officer's proposal to initiate Section 263 proceedings, rendering order liable to be set aside. ITAT based on consistency principle and absence of change in facts regarding Trust receiving government grant in earlier years accepted by Revenue for Section 11 exemption eligibility. HC found no erroneous or prejudicial assessment order u/s 143(3), dismissing appeal as no substantial question of law arose from ITAT order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
