Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

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 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (5) TMI 966

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned Assessing Officer erred in passing order under section 154 by rejecting the contention of the appellant that debatable issue cannot be considered as prima facie additions. In view of this the order under section 154 is void-ab-inito and deserves to be struck down. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CPC has erred in passing an intimation under section 143 (1) 6/07/2020 / under section 154 dated 27/10/2023 by enhancing the income by Rs. 1,82,09,000/-, by invoking provisions of section 50C of the IT Act, without appreciating the fact that provision of section 143(1)/154 does not envisage such additions, and therefore entire additions deserve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rent mistake in the return processed u/s 143(1)(A) of the Act, therefore the previous order passed u/s 154 on 27.11.2024 is hereby reversed. Further the assessee challenged the order u/s 154 of the Act but failed to get any relief from the Ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal treating as infructuous. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee has already challenged the order u/s 143(1)(A) before Ld. CIT(A) and the same is still pending to be disposed off. He stated that the apparent mistake has been accepted once by Ld. AO and then it has been reversed. He also submitted that addition u/s 50C of the Act cannot be made in processing of return u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. He also stat....