Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4883
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97649 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to procedural irregularities. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings without verifying information and the Commissioner of Income Tax granted approval without applying mind. Approval by Commissioner was without recording independent satisfaction, rendering reopening unsustainable. Consequently, notice u/s 148 and subsequent proceedings were quashed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erroneously passed order regarding Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme despite assessee not applying for immunity, hence order quashed. The Assessing Officer made addition without invoking any provision of law or specifying head of income, violating principles of natural justice by denying assessee opportunity to defend. Supreme Court rulings mandate providing reasonable notice of charges and provisions violated. Absence of such notice vitiated proceedings. Therefore, addition made by authorities was deleted and appeal allowed.
Reopening of assessment u/s 147 was invalid due to procedural irregularities. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings without verifying information and the Commissioner of Income Tax granted approval without applying mind. Approval by Commissioner was without recording independent satisfaction, rendering reopening unsustainable. Consequently, notice u/s 148 and subsequent proceedings were quashed. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erroneously passed order regarding Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme despite assessee not applying for immunity, hence order quashed. The Assessing Officer made addition without invoking any provision of law or specifying head of income, violating principles of natural justice by denying assessee opportunity to defend. Supreme Court rulings mandate providing reasonable notice of charges and provisions violated. Absence of such notice vitiated proceedings. Therefore, addition made by authorities was deleted and appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
