Membership-consent thresholds for oppression petitions are satisfied by unchallenged voter-list consents, while unsupported forgery claims require pro...
Juridical seat versus arbitral venue determines supervisory court jurisdiction, while timely award challenges remain within the prescribed limitation ...
ITAT finds the impugned CIT(A) order to be cryptic and nonspeaking, lacking independent findings and adequate application of mind to the assessee's submissions and bank records; it also records the AO's failure, without satisfactory explanation, to file the remand report despite two opportunities. Noting absence of evidence for the revenue's asserted reasons for non-compliance, and that the AO proceeded to assess under section 144 without full compliance by the assessee, ITAT sets aside the CIT(A) order and remands the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. AO is directed to examine the additional evidence produced by the assessee, obtain any necessary bank records, and decide the matter on merits.
ITAT finds the impugned CIT(A) order to be cryptic and nonspeaking, lacking independent findings and adequate application of mind to the assessee's submissions and bank records; it also records the AO's failure, without satisfactory explanation, to file the remand report despite two opportunities. Noting absence of evidence for the revenue's asserted reasons for non-compliance, and that the AO proceeded to assess under section 144 without full compliance by the assessee, ITAT sets aside the CIT(A) order and remands the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. AO is directed to examine the additional evidence produced by the assessee, obtain any necessary bank records, and decide the matter on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
