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" ?
The ITAT held that the TPO's order under s.92CA(3) is time-barred by one day and therefore invalid. The tribunal found the assessment limitation under s.153(1) expired on 31 Mar 2013, so the statutory 60-day cutoff for issuing an order under s.92CA(3A) lapsed on 29 Jan 2013; reliance on a departmental circular using the phrase "two months" could not supplant the statutory "60 days" calculation. Applying the statutory timeline strictly, the TPO's s.92CA order was barred by limitation and set aside, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The ITAT held that the TPO's order under s.92CA(3) is time-barred by one day and therefore invalid. The tribunal found the assessment limitation under s.153(1) expired on 31 Mar 2013, so the statutory 60-day cutoff for issuing an order under s.92CA(3A) lapsed on 29 Jan 2013; reliance on a departmental circular using the phrase "two months" could not supplant the statutory "60 days" calculation. Applying the statutory timeline strictly, the TPO's s.92CA order was barred by limitation and set aside, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
