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 held that the PCIT's revision u/s. 263 was misplaced and set aside: the AO had made specific enquiries into depreciation claimed u/s. 32 on immovable properties partly let out and had examined the assessee's detailed replies, taking a legally permissible view accepting depreciation for the period properties were employed in business while rental income was offered for the let-out period. Tribunal found there was neither lack nor inadequacy of inquiry by the AO, thus jurisdiction u/s. 263 could not be invoked. On merits the assessee satisfactorily demonstrated entitlement to depreciation for business use periods; the appeal was allowed and the s. 263 action quashed.
ITAT held that the PCIT's revision u/s. 263 was misplaced and set aside: the AO had made specific enquiries into depreciation claimed u/s. 32 on immovable properties partly let out and had examined the assessee's detailed replies, taking a legally permissible view accepting depreciation for the period properties were employed in business while rental income was offered for the let-out period. Tribunal found there was neither lack nor inadequacy of inquiry by the AO, thus jurisdiction u/s. 263 could not be invoked. On merits the assessee satisfactorily demonstrated entitlement to depreciation for business use periods; the appeal was allowed and the s. 263 action quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
