Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96177 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 unwarranted where the Assessing Officer had examined the assessee's accumulation claim, Form No. 10, board resolutions and utilisation particulars, and had adopted a possible view on the material before him. The Commissioner could not invoke revision merely because he wanted deeper verification or considered another view preferable; absent independent demonstration that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, the exercise amounted to an impermissible fishing enquiry. The Court also held that Explanation 2 to section 263 could not be applied without prior notice to the assessee. The alleged tax consequence of non-utilisation of accumulated income did not arise in the relevant assessment year.
Revision under section 263 was unwarranted where the Assessing Officer had examined the assessee's accumulation claim, Form No. 10, board resolutions and utilisation particulars, and had adopted a possible view on the material before him. The Commissioner could not invoke revision merely because he wanted deeper verification or considered another view preferable; absent independent demonstration that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, the exercise amounted to an impermissible fishing enquiry. The Court also held that Explanation 2 to section 263 could not be applied without prior notice to the assessee. The alleged tax consequence of non-utilisation of accumulated income did not arise in the relevant assessment year.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.