Approved gratuity fund provisions remain deductible despite general actual-payment requirements, preventing revision of the allowed gratuity deduction...
Verification of intangible software expenditure and duplicated disallowances requires record-based reassessment before depreciation and income computa...
Cash receipt aggregation requires a single transaction, event or occasion; separate partner capital contributions cannot attract cash-receipt penaltie...
The dispute concerns validity of an assessment order issued by an Assessing Officer who lacked jurisdiction due to multiple transfers of PAN jurisdiction; absence of any transfer order under the relevant statutory power prior to assessment meant jurisdiction remained with the original ITO. The tribunal applied the principle that an order by a non jurisdictional Assessing Officer is void ab initio and that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by the assessee's participation; accordingly the assessment was held void and the appellate order upholding it could not stand, appeal allowed.
The dispute concerns validity of an assessment order issued by an Assessing Officer who lacked jurisdiction due to multiple transfers of PAN jurisdiction; absence of any transfer order under the relevant statutory power prior to assessment meant jurisdiction remained with the original ITO. The tribunal applied the principle that an order by a non jurisdictional Assessing Officer is void ab initio and that jurisdiction cannot be conferred by the assessee's participation; accordingly the assessment was held void and the appellate order upholding it could not stand, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4925 
