Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The ITAT held that the ex parte dismissal by the CIT(A) did not comply with s. 250(6) of the Act because the order failed to state the points for determination, decisions thereon and reasons; accordingly the impugned order was set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction that the Appellant shall cooperate in proceedings before the CIT(A). The Tribunal treated the grounds as allowed for statistical purposes and remitted the issue for de novo consideration, rejecting the in limine dismissal and requiring the CIT(A) to decide the points with cogent reasons.
The ITAT held that the ex parte dismissal by the CIT(A) did not comply with s. 250(6) of the Act because the order failed to state the points for determination, decisions thereon and reasons; accordingly the impugned order was set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction that the Appellant shall cooperate in proceedings before the CIT(A). The Tribunal treated the grounds as allowed for statistical purposes and remitted the issue for de novo consideration, rejecting the in limine dismissal and requiring the CIT(A) to decide the points with cogent reasons.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
