Transfer pricing consistency protects identical non-interest-bearing debenture terms from a later notional-interest adjustment without valid statutory...
Rectification of debatable deduction claims cannot reverse scrutiny-approved co-operative society interest income deductions as apparent record errors...
Cash-method accounting bars presumptive interest taxation, while unsupported securities and share-trading additions require reliable material and veri...
Section 7 admission requires established financial debt and default, not precise interest quantification, while post-suspension defaults remain action...
The ITAT held that an intimation u/s 143(1) is a summary assessment confined to arithmetical and apparent errors, and once scrutiny is initiated and completed u/s 143(3), the earlier 143(1) intimation merges into the regular assessment. In this case, an apparent mistake in the return was brought to CPC through an application u/s 154, and CPC transferred rectification rights to the JAO. The ITAT observed that the JAO, having completed assessment u/s 143(3) without making any adjustment or acting on the rectification application, effectively accepted the returned income. Consequently, sustaining the adjustment proposed earlier by CPC u/s 143(1) was held to be unjustified. The ITAT directed the JAO to rectify the mistake apparent on record and delete the demand raised u/s 143(1), allowing the assessee's appeal.
The ITAT held that an intimation u/s 143(1) is a summary assessment confined to arithmetical and apparent errors, and once scrutiny is initiated and completed u/s 143(3), the earlier 143(1) intimation merges into the regular assessment. In this case, an apparent mistake in the return was brought to CPC through an application u/s 154, and CPC transferred rectification rights to the JAO. The ITAT observed that the JAO, having completed assessment u/s 143(3) without making any adjustment or acting on the rectification application, effectively accepted the returned income. Consequently, sustaining the adjustment proposed earlier by CPC u/s 143(1) was held to be unjustified. The ITAT directed the JAO to rectify the mistake apparent on record and delete the demand raised u/s 143(1), allowing the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.