Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT allowed the appeal and remanded the case for reassessment. The Tribunal found procedural irregularities in the assessment order, specifically noting that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not provide the assessee an opportunity to submit a Valuation Report from a Merchant Banker using Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method. The Tribunal directed the assessee to procure a fresh Valuation Report compliant with Rule 11UA of Income Tax Rules, 1962, and instructed the CIT(A) to review the report, obtain a remand report from AO, and provide reasonable hearing opportunity to the assessee before making a final determination on the share premium addition under Section 56(2)(viib).
ITAT allowed the appeal and remanded the case for reassessment. The Tribunal found procedural irregularities in the assessment order, specifically noting that the Assessing Officer (AO) did not provide the assessee an opportunity to submit a Valuation Report from a Merchant Banker using Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) method. The Tribunal directed the assessee to procure a fresh Valuation Report compliant with Rule 11UA of Income Tax Rules, 1962, and instructed the CIT(A) to review the report, obtain a remand report from AO, and provide reasonable hearing opportunity to the assessee before making a final determination on the share premium addition under Section 56(2)(viib).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
