Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
ITAT set aside both CIT(A) and AO orders, remanding the matter to AO for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee, an Alternative Investment Fund Category-II registered under SEBI following cash accounting, challenged additions based on Form 26AS for income not actually received. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, incorrectly assuming assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024 for assessment order when it was only for penalty order. ITAT noted assessee's inconsistent treatment of TDS income across assessment years violated proper accounting principles. DR raised no serious objection to remand request. ITAT directed AO to consider assessee's submissions per law, grant requisite relief if permissible, and make additions only after providing adequate hearing opportunity. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
ITAT set aside both CIT(A) and AO orders, remanding the matter to AO for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee, an Alternative Investment Fund Category-II registered under SEBI following cash accounting, challenged additions based on Form 26AS for income not actually received. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal as withdrawn, incorrectly assuming assessee opted for Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme 2024 for assessment order when it was only for penalty order. ITAT noted assessee's inconsistent treatment of TDS income across assessment years violated proper accounting principles. DR raised no serious objection to remand request. ITAT directed AO to consider assessee's submissions per law, grant requisite relief if permissible, and make additions only after providing adequate hearing opportunity. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.