Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
An adjustment under section 143(1)(a) disallowing employees' provident fund contribution was impermissible because, on the date of intimation, the issue was debatable and governed by binding jurisdictional High Court precedent favouring the assessee. The Tribunal held that CPC must test the legality of a prima facie adjustment with reference to the law prevailing at that time, and a later Supreme Court ruling could not justify the adjustment retrospectively. Reliance on a non-jurisdictional High Court decision did not override the prevailing jurisdictional position. The disallowance was deleted and the assessee's claim was allowed.
An adjustment under section 143(1)(a) disallowing employees' provident fund contribution was impermissible because, on the date of intimation, the issue was debatable and governed by binding jurisdictional High Court precedent favouring the assessee. The Tribunal held that CPC must test the legality of a prima facie adjustment with reference to the law prevailing at that time, and a later Supreme Court ruling could not justify the adjustment retrospectively. Reliance on a non-jurisdictional High Court decision did not override the prevailing jurisdictional position. The disallowance was deleted and the assessee's claim was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
