Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

Tax Assessment Case: Distinguishing "Lack of Inquiry" vs. "Inadequate Inquiry" Leads to Favorable Outcome for Assessee.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Distinction between "lack of inquiry and inadequate inquiry" emphasized. Assessee underwent rigorous assessment proceedings with multiple notices and replies. AO accepted returned income after due diligence, proper inquiry, and verification. Raising queries and examining records shows AO's application of mind. Entire record examined before concluding AO didn't examine any issue. Enquiry methodology prescribed followed. AO framed assessment considering assessee's replies. PCIT didn't conduct bare minimum inquiry before terming AO's order erroneous and prejudicial. Impugned PCIT order without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, irregular exercise of jurisdiction, null, void, illegal, improper exercise of revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263. Decided in assessee's favor.....