Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that the faceless assessment order was invalid as it violated the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner was not issued a show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order, which is a mandatory requirement u/s 144B retrospectively effective from April 1, 2021. The court emphasized that the principles of natural justice are statutorily recognized, and any non-adherence to the mandatory statutory provisions and these principles would render the assessment order patently illegal. An order entailing civil consequences and causing prejudice must be passed in strict adherence to natural justice principles, i.e., after issuing a show cause notice and granting an opportunity for a hearing. An order passed in breach of natural justice is vitiated, non-est, and a nullity. Consequently, the impugned assessment order, being passed without issuing a show cause notice and granting a hearing opportunity, was manifestly illegal and a nullity. The court quashed the order, allowing the petition, so that appropriate procedure under the Income Tax Act can be followed, and a valid assessment order passed.
The High Court held that the faceless assessment order was invalid as it violated the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner was not issued a show cause notice-cum-draft assessment order, which is a mandatory requirement u/s 144B retrospectively effective from April 1, 2021. The court emphasized that the principles of natural justice are statutorily recognized, and any non-adherence to the mandatory statutory provisions and these principles would render the assessment order patently illegal. An order entailing civil consequences and causing prejudice must be passed in strict adherence to natural justice principles, i.e., after issuing a show cause notice and granting an opportunity for a hearing. An order passed in breach of natural justice is vitiated, non-est, and a nullity. Consequently, the impugned assessment order, being passed without issuing a show cause notice and granting a hearing opportunity, was manifestly illegal and a nullity. The court quashed the order, allowing the petition, so that appropriate procedure under the Income Tax Act can be followed, and a valid assessment order passed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.