Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Page of 4921
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 98411 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The issue concerns whether an Assessing Officer may rely on a Valuation Officer (DVO) report delivered after the six month deadline in section 142A(6) to invoke the exclusion period under Explanation 1(v) to section 153 and thereby extend limitation. The HC agreed with the Tribunal that section 142A(6) requires the report within six months and that the exclusion-period and its proviso apply only where the report falls within that regime; a belated DVO report has no legal value to extend limitation, and the Principal Commissioner was not justified in revising the assessment under revision powers. Revenue appeal dismissed.
The issue concerns whether an Assessing Officer may rely on a Valuation Officer (DVO) report delivered after the six month deadline in section 142A(6) to invoke the exclusion period under Explanation 1(v) to section 153 and thereby extend limitation. The HC agreed with the Tribunal that section 142A(6) requires the report within six months and that the exclusion-period and its proviso apply only where the report falls within that regime; a belated DVO report has no legal value to extend limitation, and the Principal Commissioner was not justified in revising the assessment under revision powers. Revenue appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4921 
