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" ?
The case pertains to the rectification of a mistake and reopening of assessment u/s 147 versus assessment u/s 153C. The information or seized document belonging to the assessee was found at the searched person's place. The authorized representative mentioned that the Tribunal did not consider judicial decisions and dismissed the additional ground of appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision on the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. The ITAT supported its view relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Honda Siel Power Productions Ltd., where the Tribunal's rectification application was allowed as it had missed considering a precedent judgment while dismissing the appeal on enhanced depreciation u/s 43A. The ITAT held that non-consideration of cited judicial decisions is a mistake apparent from the record. Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal recalled its order and directed the registry to post the appeal for regular hearing and inform the parties.
The case pertains to the rectification of a mistake and reopening of assessment u/s 147 versus assessment u/s 153C. The information or seized document belonging to the assessee was found at the searched person's place. The authorized representative mentioned that the Tribunal did not consider judicial decisions and dismissed the additional ground of appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision on the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. The ITAT supported its view relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Honda Siel Power Productions Ltd., where the Tribunal's rectification application was allowed as it had missed considering a precedent judgment while dismissing the appeal on enhanced depreciation u/s 43A. The ITAT held that non-consideration of cited judicial decisions is a mistake apparent from the record. Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal recalled its order and directed the registry to post the appeal for regular hearing and inform the parties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
