Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Revision u/s 263 involving excess deduction of transport expenses and non-deduction of TDS on transportation charges. CIT held AO failed to verify adequately, rendering assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interests. ITAT examined AO's verification of Form 26Q, quarterly returns in Form 27A, quarter-wise details of transporters from whom TDS was deducted and those not liable u/s 194C(6). Assessee provided explanations before AO and CIT, but CIT set aside order without examining explanations or pointing out defects. ITAT found CIT's observations regarding lack of inquiry factually incorrect. u/s 263, CIT was required to inquire as deemed necessary and examine assessee's reply to form prima facie opinion on order's erroneousness prejudicing Revenue's interests. AO examined issues during assessment proceedings. Without counter-questioning assessee or considering submissions, CIT was unjustified in setting aside order merely stating more inquiries needed. CIT's order u/s 263 unsustainable, quashed by ITAT. Assessee's appeal allowed.
Revision u/s 263 involving excess deduction of transport expenses and non-deduction of TDS on transportation charges. CIT held AO failed to verify adequately, rendering assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue's interests. ITAT examined AO's verification of Form 26Q, quarterly returns in Form 27A, quarter-wise details of transporters from whom TDS was deducted and those not liable u/s 194C(6). Assessee provided explanations before AO and CIT, but CIT set aside order without examining explanations or pointing out defects. ITAT found CIT's observations regarding lack of inquiry factually incorrect. u/s 263, CIT was required to inquire as deemed necessary and examine assessee's reply to form prima facie opinion on order's erroneousness prejudicing Revenue's interests. AO examined issues during assessment proceedings. Without counter-questioning assessee or considering submissions, CIT was unjustified in setting aside order merely stating more inquiries needed. CIT's order u/s 263 unsustainable, quashed by ITAT. Assessee's appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
