Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
When an assessee files additional evidence under the remand...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates remand.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
When an assessee files additional evidence under the remand rules, the appellate authority must seek and await a meaningful remand report from the assessing officer; merely sending portal reminders and then admitting and deciding on that evidence without the AO's views violates natural justice and undermines proper best-judgment assessments. The appellate authority's routine, non-specific requisitioning is inadequate; a clear, detailed letter and sufficient time are required to enable effective examination and comment. Result: the impugned appellate order deleting additions was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh remand report with an opportunity of about four months to the AO.
When an assessee files additional evidence under the remand rules, the appellate authority must seek and await a meaningful remand report from the assessing officer; merely sending portal reminders and then admitting and deciding on that evidence without the AO's views violates natural justice and undermines proper best-judgment assessments. The appellate authority's routine, non-specific requisitioning is inadequate; a clear, detailed letter and sufficient time are required to enable effective examination and comment. Result: the impugned appellate order deleting additions was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh remand report with an opportunity of about four months to the AO.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.