Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
Transfer-pricing benchmarking and capital-receipt principles sustained taxpayer relief, while unsupported property-advance write-offs remained disallo...
The ITAT held that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(E)] u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act was quashed. The notice issued u/s 263 was not validly served on the assessee, either through registered post or email, before the hearing date. The notices were served only after the hearing date, violating the principles of natural justice. Additionally, the CIT(E)'s order was passed after the two-year limitation period prescribed u/s 263(2) had expired. Relying on the judgments of M L Chains and Tulsi Tracom (P) Ltd., the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, quashing the CIT(E)'s order due to invalid service of notice and the expiry of the limitation period.
The ITAT held that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(E)] u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act was quashed. The notice issued u/s 263 was not validly served on the assessee, either through registered post or email, before the hearing date. The notices were served only after the hearing date, violating the principles of natural justice. Additionally, the CIT(E)'s order was passed after the two-year limitation period prescribed u/s 263(2) had expired. Relying on the judgments of M L Chains and Tulsi Tracom (P) Ltd., the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, quashing the CIT(E)'s order due to invalid service of notice and the expiry of the limitation period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
