Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Where an assessee claims that receipts appearing in Form 26AS...
Timing mismatch in income recognition requires verification whether receipts were already taxed in an earlier year; matter remitted for fresh examination.
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
Where an assessee claims that receipts appearing in Form 26AS relate to an earlier year under accrual-based recognition, the crucial question is whether the same income was already taxed in that year, because double taxation of the same receipt is impermissible. The Tribunal found that the reconciliation between bills raised in the preceding year and current-year Form 26AS entries required factual verification. As adequate opportunity had not been given before the AO, and the appellate authority had not properly examined the earlier-year material, the matter was remitted for de novo verification. The assessee was to be given a reasonable opportunity to substantiate the reconciliation with supporting third-party evidence.
Where an assessee claims that receipts appearing in Form 26AS relate to an earlier year under accrual-based recognition, the crucial question is whether the same income was already taxed in that year, because double taxation of the same receipt is impermissible. The Tribunal found that the reconciliation between bills raised in the preceding year and current-year Form 26AS entries required factual verification. As adequate opportunity had not been given before the AO, and the appellate authority had not properly examined the earlier-year material, the matter was remitted for de novo verification. The assessee was to be given a reasonable opportunity to substantiate the reconciliation with supporting third-party evidence.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
