Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10041 to 10060 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the revisional order passed under s.263. The Tribunal held that the CIT failed to demonstrate any substantive material showing the impugned receipts were not professional income or that they fell within s.69/69A/69B; accordingly there was no justification to invoke s.115BBE. The AO had issued a s.142(1) questionnaire, the assessee furnished specific replies, and the AO accepted the claim and taxed the receipts at the normal rate. Mere absence of extended discussion in the assessment order did not render the order erroneous or lead to s.263 action. The revisional order was therefore set aside.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal and quashed the revisional order passed under s.263. The Tribunal held that the CIT failed to demonstrate any substantive material showing the impugned receipts were not professional income or that they fell within s.69/69A/69B; accordingly there was no justification to invoke s.115BBE. The AO had issued a s.142(1) questionnaire, the assessee furnished specific replies, and the AO accepted the claim and taxed the receipts at the normal rate. Mere absence of extended discussion in the assessment order did not render the order erroneous or lead to s.263 action. The revisional order was therefore set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
