Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
The High Court held that the authority wrongly treated the filing date of Form No. 10-IC as distinct from the date of the condonation request, despite the assessee having filed the return on time, clearly opted for section 115BAA in ITR-6, and filed Form No. 10-IC within three years from the end of the assessment year. The omission to attach the form with the return was a procedural lapse, not a ground to deny the concessional regime where the intention to opt was unambiguous and the form was filed during proceedings. The Court also found that bona fides and genuine hardship had to be examined, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits without reopening delay or limitation.
The High Court held that the authority wrongly treated the filing date of Form No. 10-IC as distinct from the date of the condonation request, despite the assessee having filed the return on time, clearly opted for section 115BAA in ITR-6, and filed Form No. 10-IC within three years from the end of the assessment year. The omission to attach the form with the return was a procedural lapse, not a ground to deny the concessional regime where the intention to opt was unambiguous and the form was filed during proceedings. The Court also found that bona fides and genuine hardship had to be examined, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision on merits without reopening delay or limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.