Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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 4828 
Join Channel 
