Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
