Independent manufacturing undertaking eligibility preserves Section 80IA/80IB deductions, while machinery kept ready for use qualifies for depreciatio...
Assessing Officer Satisfaction Requirement Bars Penalty for Cash Receipt in Immovable-Property Sale Cases Where Initiation Lacks Recorded Satisfaction...
ITAT held that the Addl./JCIT(A) erred in computing a delay of 4209 days from 28.01.2012, as there was no evidence that the intimation u/s 143(1) or any demand/recovery notice was ever served on Assessee X. ITAT observed that processing on 28.01.2012 could not have been pursuant to CBDT Circular No.13/2016 and, in absence of proof of service, concluded that limitation could not run from that date. Consequently, dismissal of the appeal on limitation without examining merits was held unsustainable. On the substantive issue of status change from "any other AOP" to "LLP" without opportunity, the matter was remanded to the Jurisdictional AO to re-examine the correct status after hearing Assessee X. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
ITAT held that the Addl./JCIT(A) erred in computing a delay of 4209 days from 28.01.2012, as there was no evidence that the intimation u/s 143(1) or any demand/recovery notice was ever served on Assessee X. ITAT observed that processing on 28.01.2012 could not have been pursuant to CBDT Circular No.13/2016 and, in absence of proof of service, concluded that limitation could not run from that date. Consequently, dismissal of the appeal on limitation without examining merits was held unsustainable. On the substantive issue of status change from "any other AOP" to "LLP" without opportunity, the matter was remanded to the Jurisdictional AO to re-examine the correct status after hearing Assessee X. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4888 
