Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
Reopening of assessment under income tax law was challenged after a capital reduction where payment to shareholders used the securities premium account. The taxpayer produced ledger entries, share certificates, tax residence certificates, ROC registration of capital reduction and remittance proofs in response to AO queries. The commentary concludes that the taxpayer had made full and true disclosure of material facts, Explanation (1) to the reopening provision did not apply, and the reopening failed to satisfy the proviso criteria; consequently the reassessment was held invalid and the appeal allowed.
Reopening of assessment under income tax law was challenged after a capital reduction where payment to shareholders used the securities premium account. The taxpayer produced ledger entries, share certificates, tax residence certificates, ROC registration of capital reduction and remittance proofs in response to AO queries. The commentary concludes that the taxpayer had made full and true disclosure of material facts, Explanation (1) to the reopening provision did not apply, and the reopening failed to satisfy the proviso criteria; consequently the reassessment was held invalid and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.