Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Time limitation for passing an order u/s 92CA is a contentious issue. The Tribunal followed the Madras High Court's decision in Pfizer Healthcare, but the Revenue has filed an SLP challenging it before the Supreme Court. Interpretation of Section 92CA's interplay with Section 153 regarding limitation is pending consideration by the Supreme Court. The Bombay High Court's order in PayPal Payments is also challenged before the Supreme Court. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the appeals are adjourned sine die, awaiting the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues. Proceeding otherwise would necessitate cross-appeals, adding to the multiplicity.
Time limitation for passing an order u/s 92CA is a contentious issue. The Tribunal followed the Madras High Court's decision in Pfizer Healthcare, but the Revenue has filed an SLP challenging it before the Supreme Court. Interpretation of Section 92CA's interplay with Section 153 regarding limitation is pending consideration by the Supreme Court. The Bombay High Court's order in PayPal Payments is also challenged before the Supreme Court. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the appeals are adjourned sine die, awaiting the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues. Proceeding otherwise would necessitate cross-appeals, adding to the multiplicity.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
