<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Tribunal Quashes CIT&#039;s Revision Order, Upholds AO&#039;s Salary Payment Assessment as Properly Inquired and Verified.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77590</link>
    <description>In the ITAT Jaipur case, the issue revolved around a revision u/s 263 by CIT concerning the assessee&#039;s case under limited scrutiny u/s 143(3). The primary focus was on payments to specified persons and a percentage disallowance on salary payments. The tribunal held that the AO had conducted inquiries and verified details submitted by the assessee, allowing the salary payments. The observations by the PCIT were based on a different assessment year, and a disallowance in one year cannot be the basis for doubting claims in another year. The tribunal concluded that the revision proceedings by the PCIT were beyond jurisdiction and against legal principles, quashing the order u/s 263 and allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 08:20:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 08:20:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=753733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal Quashes CIT&#039;s Revision Order, Upholds AO&#039;s Salary Payment Assessment as Properly Inquired and Verified.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77590</link>
      <description>In the ITAT Jaipur case, the issue revolved around a revision u/s 263 by CIT concerning the assessee&#039;s case under limited scrutiny u/s 143(3). The primary focus was on payments to specified persons and a percentage disallowance on salary payments. The tribunal held that the AO had conducted inquiries and verified details submitted by the assessee, allowing the salary payments. The observations by the PCIT were based on a different assessment year, and a disallowance in one year cannot be the basis for doubting claims in another year. The tribunal concluded that the revision proceedings by the PCIT were beyond jurisdiction and against legal principles, quashing the order u/s 263 and allowing the assessee&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2024 08:20:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77590</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>