Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
ITAT determined that an LLP partner voluntarily opting for account audit under second proviso to Rule 24(8) triggers mandatory audit requirement. The tribunal held that since return was filed on 17.09.2019, which is within the prescribed due date of 30.09.2019 under Section 139(1), the assessee satisfies statutory conditions. Consequently, the LLP is eligible to carry forward business losses as per Section 139(3), and the assessee's appeal was allowed, establishing that voluntary audit election does not prejudice loss carry-forward rights when timely return filing occurs.
ITAT determined that an LLP partner voluntarily opting for account audit under second proviso to Rule 24(8) triggers mandatory audit requirement. The tribunal held that since return was filed on 17.09.2019, which is within the prescribed due date of 30.09.2019 under Section 139(1), the assessee satisfies statutory conditions. Consequently, the LLP is eligible to carry forward business losses as per Section 139(3), and the assessee's appeal was allowed, establishing that voluntary audit election does not prejudice loss carry-forward rights when timely return filing occurs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
