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...
HC held that the AO committed illegality by ignoring a timely-filed revised return under s.139(5) (filed 23.02.2015) and proceeding on the original return pursuant to notice under s.143(2), rendering the assessment order invalid. The ITAT erred in recording an incorrect revised-return date and wrongly treating the defect as mere irregularity. The HC held the original return stood obliterated upon filing of the revised return, and s.143 applies equally to revised returns. The HC set aside the AO's assessment order, held the ITAT's conclusion perverse, and remitted the matter to the AO for fresh determination of taxable income after taking into account the revised return, in accordance with law.
HC held that the AO committed illegality by ignoring a timely-filed revised return under s.139(5) (filed 23.02.2015) and proceeding on the original return pursuant to notice under s.143(2), rendering the assessment order invalid. The ITAT erred in recording an incorrect revised-return date and wrongly treating the defect as mere irregularity. The HC held the original return stood obliterated upon filing of the revised return, and s.143 applies equally to revised returns. The HC set aside the AO's assessment order, held the ITAT's conclusion perverse, and remitted the matter to the AO for fresh determination of taxable income after taking into account the revised return, in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.