Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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 4828 
Join Channel 
