Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessee received funds from four parties, which were not considered by the Assessing Officer (AO) during assessment proceedings u/s 147 read with Section 144. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) cancelled the assessment framed by AO and directed to frame assessment afresh after verifying the funds received. However, the Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment framed by AO cannot be considered erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue's interest as the AO was unaware of these funds during assessment proceedings. Invoking Section 263 by PCIT is invalid as per the Supreme Court's judgment in Malabar Industries Limited case, which mandates that for invoking Section 263, the assessment order must be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interest. Assessee's appeal allowed.
Assessee received funds from four parties, which were not considered by the Assessing Officer (AO) during assessment proceedings u/s 147 read with Section 144. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) cancelled the assessment framed by AO and directed to frame assessment afresh after verifying the funds received. However, the Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment framed by AO cannot be considered erroneous or prejudicial to the revenue's interest as the AO was unaware of these funds during assessment proceedings. Invoking Section 263 by PCIT is invalid as per the Supreme Court's judgment in Malabar Industries Limited case, which mandates that for invoking Section 263, the assessment order must be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interest. Assessee's appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.