https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180605 The Court ruled in favor of the revenue, affirming the Tribunal's and Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s decisions. It validated the assessment on an unregistered firm (URF) and corrected the technical error of listing the status as an Association of Persons (AOP). The Court dismissed the jurisdictional error claim, confirming that the Income-tax Officer's mistake was technical and rectified properly. It upheld the disallowance of purchases due to their bogus nature. The other questions were considered academic and left unanswered, with each party bearing its own costs. en-us Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Feb 2024 15:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180605 The Court ruled in favor of the revenue, affirming the Tribunal's and Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s decisions. It validated the assessment on an unregistered firm (URF) and corrected the technical error of listing the status as an Association of Persons (AOP). The Court dismissed the jurisdictional error claim, confirming that the Income-tax Officer's mistake was technical and rectified properly. It upheld the disallowance of purchases due to their bogus nature. The other questions were considered academic and left unanswered, with each party bearing its own costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 16 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180605