Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Commissioner's invocation of Section 263 for revision of the assessment order was unjustified as the twin conditions of the order being erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests were not satisfied. The Assessing Officer had issued a specific show cause notice regarding treatment of excess stock as unexplained investment u/s 69, which the assessee explained, and the AO accepted one of the possible views. The ITAT rightly held that the AO's order, passed after due inquiry, was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue interests, thereby setting aside the Commissioner's revisionary action u/s 263. The decision favored the assessee.
The Commissioner's invocation of Section 263 for revision of the assessment order was unjustified as the twin conditions of the order being erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests were not satisfied. The Assessing Officer had issued a specific show cause notice regarding treatment of excess stock as unexplained investment u/s 69, which the assessee explained, and the AO accepted one of the possible views. The ITAT rightly held that the AO's order, passed after due inquiry, was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue interests, thereby setting aside the Commissioner's revisionary action u/s 263. The decision favored the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.