Central Government rescinds 2017 notification creating 4.05-hectare SEZ at Ameenpur after developer de-notification request; state no-objection confir...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10901 to 10920 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the Commissioner (Appeals) lawfully set aside levy of interest and penalty and the assessment order merged into the appeal order, resulting in disposal in favour of the assessee. The High Court found that revisional jurisdiction under s.57(1)(a) could not extend to orders of an officer of coequal rank and that delegated powers cannot contravene the parent Act. The Tribunal's invocation of s.62 to rectify the error was sustained: the Deputy Commissioner (Administration) lacked revisional competence over the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). Consequently the Tribunal's order was upheld, the issue decided against the Revenue, and the reference disposed of.
HC held that the Commissioner (Appeals) lawfully set aside levy of interest and penalty and the assessment order merged into the appeal order, resulting in disposal in favour of the assessee. The High Court found that revisional jurisdiction under s.57(1)(a) could not extend to orders of an officer of coequal rank and that delegated powers cannot contravene the parent Act. The Tribunal's invocation of s.62 to rectify the error was sustained: the Deputy Commissioner (Administration) lacked revisional competence over the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals). Consequently the Tribunal's order was upheld, the issue decided against the Revenue, and the reference disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
