Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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 4819 
Join Channel 
