Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Straight-line lease rental accounting change results in penalty quashed where disclosed accounts and bona fide arguable accounting interpretation exis...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT dismissed the assessee's appeal and upheld the PCIT's revisional order u/s 263. It held that the reassessment order dated 30.03.2023 was an "order" independent of the original assessment and was within the limitation period prescribed in s.263(2), hence not barred by limitation. Adequate opportunity of hearing was found to have been afforded through multiple notices and written submissions, satisfying the requirement of s.263, including by electronic mode as per s.2(23C). The AO's failure to disallow delayed employees' PF/ESI contributions, contrary to s.36(1)(va) and binding precedent, rendered the reassessment order both erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The ground on customs duty fine/penalty was not pressed and stood rejected.
ITAT dismissed the assessee's appeal and upheld the PCIT's revisional order u/s 263. It held that the reassessment order dated 30.03.2023 was an "order" independent of the original assessment and was within the limitation period prescribed in s.263(2), hence not barred by limitation. Adequate opportunity of hearing was found to have been afforded through multiple notices and written submissions, satisfying the requirement of s.263, including by electronic mode as per s.2(23C). The AO's failure to disallow delayed employees' PF/ESI contributions, contrary to s.36(1)(va) and binding precedent, rendered the reassessment order both erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue. The ground on customs duty fine/penalty was not pressed and stood rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.