Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
Disciplinary proportionality requires penalties for Authorised Representative misconduct to match proven harm, leading to reconsideration of registrat...
The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 02.02.2024 rejecting the Rectification Application filed by the petitioner. The court found that the order lacked reasoning as to why there was no error apparent on the record to reject rectification. The court held that when an assessee seeks rectification, and the same is rejected without considering reasons or providing an opportunity to the assessee, it is contrary to Section 161. Consequently, the Rectification Application filed by the petitioner shall be considered afresh by the respondent after providing an opportunity to the petitioner, and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law.
The High Court set aside the impugned order dated 02.02.2024 rejecting the Rectification Application filed by the petitioner. The court found that the order lacked reasoning as to why there was no error apparent on the record to reject rectification. The court held that when an assessee seeks rectification, and the same is rejected without considering reasons or providing an opportunity to the assessee, it is contrary to Section 161. Consequently, the Rectification Application filed by the petitioner shall be considered afresh by the respondent after providing an opportunity to the petitioner, and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
