Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC held that revisional authority's refusal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 264 was legally untenable. The authority's reasoning that revision was not maintainable because order was appealable and assessee had not filed appeal was contrary to law. Further, the authority's position that intimation under Section 143(1) was not amenable to revision jurisdiction was incorrect, as established in multiple precedents. The court set aside the impugned order dated February 12, 2021, finding both grounds for declining jurisdiction unsustainable. The revision petition was restored to be decided on merits by the revisional authority in accordance with law.
HC held that revisional authority's refusal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 264 was legally untenable. The authority's reasoning that revision was not maintainable because order was appealable and assessee had not filed appeal was contrary to law. Further, the authority's position that intimation under Section 143(1) was not amenable to revision jurisdiction was incorrect, as established in multiple precedents. The court set aside the impugned order dated February 12, 2021, finding both grounds for declining jurisdiction unsustainable. The revision petition was restored to be decided on merits by the revisional authority in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.