Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 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 the assessment order dated 28.09.2021 passed by the AO under s.143(3) read with s.254 (or alternatively noted as r.w.s.254) was time-barred and invalid. The Tribunal found the fresh assessment mandate arose on 17.05.2019 and, applying the first proviso to s.153(3), required completion within 12 months from the end of the FY in which the tribunal order was rendered (limitation expiring 31.03.2021). Temporary timeline extensions related to COVID-19 could not revive an otherwise barred assessment. Consequently the s.143(3) assessment dated 28.09.2021 was quashed and the appeal allowed in favour of the assessee.
The ITAT held that the assessment order dated 28.09.2021 passed by the AO under s.143(3) read with s.254 (or alternatively noted as r.w.s.254) was time-barred and invalid. The Tribunal found the fresh assessment mandate arose on 17.05.2019 and, applying the first proviso to s.153(3), required completion within 12 months from the end of the FY in which the tribunal order was rendered (limitation expiring 31.03.2021). Temporary timeline extensions related to COVID-19 could not revive an otherwise barred assessment. Consequently the s.143(3) assessment dated 28.09.2021 was quashed and the appeal allowed in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.