Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Administrative fraud classification suspension does not halt independent criminal investigation or warrant-based searches into alleged economic offenc...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT held that Explanation 2 to section 263, inserted with effect from 1.6.2015, cannot be applied retrospectively to the assessment year 2013-14. The revision under section 263 requires the Commissioner to form a reasoned opinion that the assessment order was passed without necessary inquiry or verification. In this case, the assessee provided detailed explanations showing adequate verification by the AO. The Commissioner failed to specify what further inquiries were necessary or identify any defects in the assessee's submissions. Consequently, the exercise of revision jurisdiction by the Commissioner was without valid basis and amounted to invalid jurisdiction. The impugned order under section 263 was quashed, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that Explanation 2 to section 263, inserted with effect from 1.6.2015, cannot be applied retrospectively to the assessment year 2013-14. The revision under section 263 requires the Commissioner to form a reasoned opinion that the assessment order was passed without necessary inquiry or verification. In this case, the assessee provided detailed explanations showing adequate verification by the AO. The Commissioner failed to specify what further inquiries were necessary or identify any defects in the assessee's submissions. Consequently, the exercise of revision jurisdiction by the Commissioner was without valid basis and amounted to invalid jurisdiction. The impugned order under section 263 was quashed, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.