Appeal allows marketing payments as deductible business expenses under Sec.37; director pay retained; R&D deductible from certificate date under Sec.3...
Registration under s.12AB upheld; CIT(Exemptions) exceeded jurisdiction by deciding taxability instead of preliminary verification and registration di...
ITAT holds that the CIT(A) erred in issuing a part order on jurisdictional points while leaving the assessee's substantive grounds undecided and directs a single consolidated adjudication. Treating section 250(6) of the I.T. Act as directory, the Tribunal notes the statutory expectation that the CIT(A) determine all points in one order within the prescribed timeframe. Applying section 251(1)(a), and given the assessment was framed under s.143(3), the CIT(A) was not obliged to await any collateral annulment question before confirming, reducing or enhancing the assessment. The matter is remitted to the CIT(A) to decide all grounds in the appeal by one consolidated order; appeal disposed accordingly.
ITAT holds that the CIT(A) erred in issuing a part order on jurisdictional points while leaving the assessee's substantive grounds undecided and directs a single consolidated adjudication. Treating section 250(6) of the I.T. Act as directory, the Tribunal notes the statutory expectation that the CIT(A) determine all points in one order within the prescribed timeframe. Applying section 251(1)(a), and given the assessment was framed under s.143(3), the CIT(A) was not obliged to await any collateral annulment question before confirming, reducing or enhancing the assessment. The matter is remitted to the CIT(A) to decide all grounds in the appeal by one consolidated order; appeal disposed accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
