Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4883
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97649 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the impugned notice and order were quashed due to lack of jurisdictional propriety. The respondent-Authority failed to provide adequate intimation regarding ITC reversal, and the petitioner demonstrated genuine unawareness of procedural requirements. The Court remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a de novo examination of ITC reversal for 2017-18, directing a fresh order within twelve weeks. While the Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal on delay grounds, the HC recognized procedural constraints and procedural fairness, effectively setting aside the original order and providing an opportunity for proper administrative review.
HC held that the impugned notice and order were quashed due to lack of jurisdictional propriety. The respondent-Authority failed to provide adequate intimation regarding ITC reversal, and the petitioner demonstrated genuine unawareness of procedural requirements. The Court remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a de novo examination of ITC reversal for 2017-18, directing a fresh order within twelve weeks. While the Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal on delay grounds, the HC recognized procedural constraints and procedural fairness, effectively setting aside the original order and providing an opportunity for proper administrative review.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4883 
