Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Revision under section 263 was held unsustainable where the Assessing Officer had already initiated penalty proceedings, because the revisional authority could not invoke section 263 merely to substitute the penalty provision under which those proceedings were initiated. The Tribunal found that, once penalty action had been commenced, the assessment order could not be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on this ground alone. The foundation of the revisional order was therefore legally untenable, and the assessee succeeded.
Revision under section 263 was held unsustainable where the Assessing Officer had already initiated penalty proceedings, because the revisional authority could not invoke section 263 merely to substitute the penalty provision under which those proceedings were initiated. The Tribunal found that, once penalty action had been commenced, the assessment order could not be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on this ground alone. The foundation of the revisional order was therefore legally untenable, and the assessee succeeded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.