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 allowed the assessee's appeal against exercise of revisionary jurisdiction under s.263 by the PCIT, holding that the AO had in fact made inquiries into the assessee's claim of substantial agricultural income. Notices under s.142(1), a show-cause notice and filed responses with documents demonstrated that the AO considered and accepted a possible view; any alleged inadequacy of inquiry did not equate to "no inquiry." Explanation 2 to s.263 does not permit the PCIT to reappraise evidence and substitute his opinion where inquiries were made and a plausible conclusion recorded. The PCIT's assumption of jurisdiction was therefore invalid and the revision order was set aside.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal against exercise of revisionary jurisdiction under s.263 by the PCIT, holding that the AO had in fact made inquiries into the assessee's claim of substantial agricultural income. Notices under s.142(1), a show-cause notice and filed responses with documents demonstrated that the AO considered and accepted a possible view; any alleged inadequacy of inquiry did not equate to "no inquiry." Explanation 2 to s.263 does not permit the PCIT to reappraise evidence and substitute his opinion where inquiries were made and a plausible conclusion recorded. The PCIT's assumption of jurisdiction was therefore invalid and the revision order was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.