Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
