Country of Origin Certificates and declared transaction value supported preferential customs exemption where authenticity and invoice prices remained ...
Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revision under section 263 challenged the validity of an exemption claim under section 54 on grounds that the assessing officer failed to examine supporting materials; tribunal found the AO had issued a specific query under section 142(1), the assessee uploaded conveyance deed and supporting evidence in response, and assessment followed that examination. Consequently the reassessment order under section 263 was not sustainable because the assessment was not shown to be erroneous or prejudicial where relevant details were on record and considered. Reliance was placed on prior judicial authority supporting that record-based examination negates the ground for revision.
Revision under section 263 challenged the validity of an exemption claim under section 54 on grounds that the assessing officer failed to examine supporting materials; tribunal found the AO had issued a specific query under section 142(1), the assessee uploaded conveyance deed and supporting evidence in response, and assessment followed that examination. Consequently the reassessment order under section 263 was not sustainable because the assessment was not shown to be erroneous or prejudicial where relevant details were on record and considered. Reliance was placed on prior judicial authority supporting that record-based examination negates the ground for revision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
