Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.