Mere completion of assessment under section 143(3) doesn’t automatically merge the intimation under section 143(1) with the assessment order
ITAT Ahmedabad condones Saraswati Trust’s late appeal due to consultant error, remands case for fresh consideration under Section 12A.
Narayani Industry Vs State of Bihar (Patna High Court) The esteemed Patna High Court, in the case of M/s. Narayani Industry v. State of Bihar [Civil Writ Jurisdiction No. 11333 of 2023 dated August 11, 2023], ruled that in instances where a statute prescribes a definite timeframe for the condonation of delay, the Appellate Authority […]
Explore circumstances triggering Notice U/s Section 133(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Uncover how technology aids the Income Tax Department in identifying tax evasion, including cases of fake deductions, underreported income, unsecured loans, and scrutiny of financial transactions. Understand the importance of prompt response to notices and the potential penalties for non-compliance. Author CA. Shiv Kumar Sharma provides insights to help navigate through these situations.
ITAT Chennai ruled to correct an arithmetical error made during scrutiny assessment, directing the Assessing Officer to allow the full Section 10AA deduction.
Bombay High Court held that show cause notice should be adjudicated within a reasonable time and there should not be an egregious, unjustified and unexplained inordinate delay.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that activity of manufacturing of tugs and barges cannot be classified as supply of manpower and hence cannot be taxed under the category of Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service.
Kerala High Court held that clarification order accepts classification of Clohex and Clohex Plus as medicament, based on the fact that they were manufactured under a drug licence. However, there is no reason discernible from clarification order as to why Senquel-AD Mouthwash which is presented in a similar form cannot also be classified as a medicament.
Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed the writ petition and directed department not to act in furtherance of order passed by appellate authority till the time appellate tribunal in term of Section 109 of the Himachal Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is constituted.
ITAT Delhi held that law does not confer any power on the Assessing Officer to either withdraw or modify or substitute one assessment order passed by him earlier with another assessment order subsequently.
