Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and held the Revenue's rectification/miscellaneous application under section 254(2) to be not maintainable, directing deletion of the impugned addition of Rs. 21,73,975/-. The Tribunal found the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to be infirm and perverse, having relied on an invalid DVO report and having denied the assessee the benefit of the rate differential between CPWD and PWD rates when valuing the investment property. The Tribunal further applied the HC principle that the limitation period under s.254(2) runs from actual receipt of the ITAT order sought to be reviewed, and, on these grounds, dismissed the Revenue's application.
The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and held the Revenue's rectification/miscellaneous application under section 254(2) to be not maintainable, directing deletion of the impugned addition of Rs. 21,73,975/-. The Tribunal found the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to be infirm and perverse, having relied on an invalid DVO report and having denied the assessee the benefit of the rate differential between CPWD and PWD rates when valuing the investment property. The Tribunal further applied the HC principle that the limitation period under s.254(2) runs from actual receipt of the ITAT order sought to be reviewed, and, on these grounds, dismissed the Revenue's application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
