Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Issue was whether CPC could, in an intimation under s.143(1)(a)(ii), treat a belated return as an "incorrect claim" and deny deduction under s.80P for the relevant AY. Although coordinate benches had held that belated filing is not covered by the Explanation to "incorrect claim" and noted that a specific adjustment for such disallowance was introduced only by s.143(1)(a)(v) w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the Tribunal followed the binding precedent of the jurisdictional HC, which had upheld denial of s.80P in s.143(1)(a)(ii) where the return was not filed within s.139(1) due date; hence the intimation was sustained and the appeal was dismissed. - ITAT
Issue was whether CPC could, in an intimation under s.143(1)(a)(ii), treat a belated return as an "incorrect claim" and deny deduction under s.80P for the relevant AY. Although coordinate benches had held that belated filing is not covered by the Explanation to "incorrect claim" and noted that a specific adjustment for such disallowance was introduced only by s.143(1)(a)(v) w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the Tribunal followed the binding precedent of the jurisdictional HC, which had upheld denial of s.80P in s.143(1)(a)(ii) where the return was not filed within s.139(1) due date; hence the intimation was sustained and the appeal was dismissed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
