Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
