Regulatory consolidation for investment advisers: SEBI issues master circular consolidating guidance and prescribing compliance, reporting, fees and s...
Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
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.