Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
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...
Where a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) expressly accepted the returned income and made no addition or disallowance, the computation sheet could not override the assessment order. Once the regular assessment was completed, the earlier intimation under section 143(1) merged into it and lost independent existence, so the Assessing Officer could not rely on that earlier adjustment to justify a higher assessed income. The Tribunal further held that revising total income on these facts was not a mistake apparent from the record but a substantive re-determination of income, making section 154 unavailable. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable and the income had to remain as determined in the scrutiny assessment.
Where a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) expressly accepted the returned income and made no addition or disallowance, the computation sheet could not override the assessment order. Once the regular assessment was completed, the earlier intimation under section 143(1) merged into it and lost independent existence, so the Assessing Officer could not rely on that earlier adjustment to justify a higher assessed income. The Tribunal further held that revising total income on these facts was not a mistake apparent from the record but a substantive re-determination of income, making section 154 unavailable. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable and the income had to remain as determined in the scrutiny assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.