International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
Corrigendum rectifying an inadvertent corporate name error in...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh assessment.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Corrigendum rectifying an inadvertent corporate name error in the revision order was held valid where the show cause predated amalgamation and the Principal CIT remedied the clerical mistake; grounds that the order named a non existent entity were rejected. The Tribunal held revisionary jurisdiction applicable to faceless assessments (NaFAC/AU) and found the AO's assessment erroneous and prejudicial for failing to make enquiries he ought to have made-accepting submissions and documents without verification on provisions for doubtful advances, inventory ageing and related party transactions. The matter was remitted for de novo assessment in accordance with the impugned section 263 order.
Corrigendum rectifying an inadvertent corporate name error in the revision order was held valid where the show cause predated amalgamation and the Principal CIT remedied the clerical mistake; grounds that the order named a non existent entity were rejected. The Tribunal held revisionary jurisdiction applicable to faceless assessments (NaFAC/AU) and found the AO's assessment erroneous and prejudicial for failing to make enquiries he ought to have made-accepting submissions and documents without verification on provisions for doubtful advances, inventory ageing and related party transactions. The matter was remitted for de novo assessment in accordance with the impugned section 263 order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
