Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Scientific research association approval requires continuing SIRO status, annual donation reporting, and donor certificates for the approved foundatio...
Page of 4888
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
241 to 260 of 97755 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 appeal and set aside the s.263 revision order of the PCIT. The Tribunal held that Explanation 2 to s.263(1) was invoked by the PCIT in the final order without being specified in the show-cause notice or affording the assessee an opportunity to meet that specific contention, thereby violating principles of natural justice. In consequence, the invocation of Explanation 2 was unsustainable and rendered the revision order prejudicial and void. The s.263 order was quashed and the grounds of the assessee upheld, restoring the original reassessment outcome.
ITAT allowed the appeal and set aside the s.263 revision order of the PCIT. The Tribunal held that Explanation 2 to s.263(1) was invoked by the PCIT in the final order without being specified in the show-cause notice or affording the assessee an opportunity to meet that specific contention, thereby violating principles of natural justice. In consequence, the invocation of Explanation 2 was unsustainable and rendered the revision order prejudicial and void. The s.263 order was quashed and the grounds of the assessee upheld, restoring the original reassessment outcome.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.