ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, holding the assessment order dated 28/12/2019 passed u/s 143(3) invalid insofar as it proceeded beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny under notice dated 11/09/2018. The Tribunal found the AO treated a forfeited advance as income u/s 56(2)(ix) without this issue being included in the limited scrutiny notice and without obtaining prior approval of the PCIT as mandated by CBDT instructions under s.119. The AO therefore exceeded jurisdiction and breached departmental instructions; the resultant assessment is bad in law and set aside, with relief granted to the assessee on the legal issue.
ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, holding the assessment order dated 28/12/2019 passed u/s 143(3) invalid insofar as it proceeded beyond the scope of the limited scrutiny under notice dated 11/09/2018. The Tribunal found the AO treated a forfeited advance as income u/s 56(2)(ix) without this issue being included in the limited scrutiny notice and without obtaining prior approval of the PCIT as mandated by CBDT instructions under s.119. The AO therefore exceeded jurisdiction and breached departmental instructions; the resultant assessment is bad in law and set aside, with relief granted to the assessee on the legal issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.