Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
HC held that the AO's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interests under Section 263. The court found no evidence that the AO examined the depreciation claim on leasehold improvements during assessment proceedings. The CIT (Appeals) and Tribunal's concurrent findings were justified, as the AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or address the 100% depreciation claim for the assessment year. The order was consequently decided against the assessee, affirming procedural deficiencies in the original assessment.
HC held that the AO's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue's interests under Section 263. The court found no evidence that the AO examined the depreciation claim on leasehold improvements during assessment proceedings. The CIT (Appeals) and Tribunal's concurrent findings were justified, as the AO failed to conduct proper inquiry or address the 100% depreciation claim for the assessment year. The order was consequently decided against the assessee, affirming procedural deficiencies in the original assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
