Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
Continuing offence of money-laundering: discharge set aside and proceedings reinstated where laundering continued after inclusion of predicate offence...
Under Section 144C the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) should have dismissed the petitioner's objections simpliciter because a final assessment order had already been passed; therefore the DRP's findings on whether the objections were intimated to the assessing officer were unwarranted. The operative effect directed is that those DRP observations shall not be considered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who must decide the taxpayer's appeal against the final assessment order without being influenced by the impugned DRP order.
Under Section 144C the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) should have dismissed the petitioner's objections simpliciter because a final assessment order had already been passed; therefore the DRP's findings on whether the objections were intimated to the assessing officer were unwarranted. The operative effect directed is that those DRP observations shall not be considered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who must decide the taxpayer's appeal against the final assessment order without being influenced by the impugned DRP order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
