Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
ITAT affirmed that the AO validly invoked s.154 to correct an apparent error and increase the domestic company tax rate from 29% to 30% where the assessee was incorporated on 02.08.2016 and therefore had no turnover in PY 2014-15; Paragraph E( i ) of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 2017 (29% concessional rate) applies only to domestic companies existing in PY 2014-15 with turnover ≤ Rs.5 crore, whereas the assessee falls within clause (ii) prescribing 30%. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s conclusion and dismissed the assessee's grounds, rejecting the analogy to prior-year turnover and finding the s.143(3) figure of 29% to be an obvious record error corrected lawfully under s.154.
ITAT affirmed that the AO validly invoked s.154 to correct an apparent error and increase the domestic company tax rate from 29% to 30% where the assessee was incorporated on 02.08.2016 and therefore had no turnover in PY 2014-15; Paragraph E( i ) of the First Schedule to the Finance Act, 2017 (29% concessional rate) applies only to domestic companies existing in PY 2014-15 with turnover ≤ Rs.5 crore, whereas the assessee falls within clause (ii) prescribing 30%. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s conclusion and dismissed the assessee's grounds, rejecting the analogy to prior-year turnover and finding the s.143(3) figure of 29% to be an obvious record error corrected lawfully under s.154.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
