Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
ITAT held that a PCIT order under s.127 effected exclusive jurisdiction transfer to DCIT/ACIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai with effect from 09.12.2020; administrative delay in ITBA migration does not defer legal effect. Consequently, the ITO, Ward-4, Tirunelveli's notice issued u/s 143(2) on 29.06.2021 was without jurisdiction, invalid and liable to be quashed, rendering any resulting assessment order void ab initio. On merits, ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions: an addition for alleged undisclosed business income based solely on survey notings was unsupported by corroborative evidence, and an addition u/s 68 read with s.115BBE was incorrect as amounts were opening balances, not credits in the year.
ITAT held that a PCIT order under s.127 effected exclusive jurisdiction transfer to DCIT/ACIT, Central Circle-2, Madurai with effect from 09.12.2020; administrative delay in ITBA migration does not defer legal effect. Consequently, the ITO, Ward-4, Tirunelveli's notice issued u/s 143(2) on 29.06.2021 was without jurisdiction, invalid and liable to be quashed, rendering any resulting assessment order void ab initio. On merits, ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of additions: an addition for alleged undisclosed business income based solely on survey notings was unsupported by corroborative evidence, and an addition u/s 68 read with s.115BBE was incorrect as amounts were opening balances, not credits in the year.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
