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...
The first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) is mandatory and requires that any proposed adjustment to a return of income be intimated to the assessee in writing or electronically and the assessee be given an opportunity to respond; failure to issue that intimation renders any adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) invalid. On the facts, no such intimation was issued and the intimation order was quashed. The Revenue's argument that issuing the intimation would be futile was rejected: compliance with the mandatory intimation requirement cannot be bypassed, and the assessee could potentially respond (including by seeking condonation) before any adjustment is made.
The first proviso to Section 143(1)(a) is mandatory and requires that any proposed adjustment to a return of income be intimated to the assessee in writing or electronically and the assessee be given an opportunity to respond; failure to issue that intimation renders any adjustment under Section 143(1)(a) invalid. On the facts, no such intimation was issued and the intimation order was quashed. The Revenue's argument that issuing the intimation would be futile was rejected: compliance with the mandatory intimation requirement cannot be bypassed, and the assessee could potentially respond (including by seeking condonation) before any adjustment is made.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.