Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Prima facie adjustment under section 143(1) cannot be used to reject an exempt dividend claim where the issue requires examination of the Act and is not apparent from the return. The Tribunal held that CPC could not mechanically treat the dividend as taxable on the basis of a schedule mismatch, because the assessee had disclosed the receipt and the dispute concerned its taxability. It further held that the same dividend issue had already been examined and accepted in scrutiny assessment under section 143(3), so the summary processing could not stand in contradiction to that concluded assessment. The adjustment was deleted.
Prima facie adjustment under section 143(1) cannot be used to reject an exempt dividend claim where the issue requires examination of the Act and is not apparent from the return. The Tribunal held that CPC could not mechanically treat the dividend as taxable on the basis of a schedule mismatch, because the assessee had disclosed the receipt and the dispute concerned its taxability. It further held that the same dividend issue had already been examined and accepted in scrutiny assessment under section 143(3), so the summary processing could not stand in contradiction to that concluded assessment. The adjustment was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
