Taxcharcha
Income TaxRecent Case Laws

The provisions of Section 142(2C) did not preclude the exercise of jurisdiction and authority by the assessing officer to extend time for the submission of the audit report directed under sub-section (2A), without an application by the assessee. We hold and declare that the amendment was intended to remove an ambiguity and is clarificatory in nature – Supreme Court

by Team Taxcharcha0992
Refund under Inverted duty structure

 

 

[docxpresso file=”https://taxcharcha.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Supreme-Court.odt” comments=”true” SVG=”true”]

To Download, Commissioner of Income-tax, New Delhi) vs Ram Kishan Dass Civil Appeal Nos. 3211 to 3230 of 2019 oths.

Related posts

Where the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order exparte due to non appearance by the assessee, the assessee is given one final opportunity of being heard and in case of adjournment, the CIT(A) can pass any order which e may deem fit under law. – ITAT Delhi

Team Taxcharcha

Where the notice issued by the CIT(A) was not served on the assessee and the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte on the non appearance of the assessee. The same remanded back to the CIT(A) – ITAT Delhi

Team Taxcharcha

It is irrelevant whether the assessee is a public sector undertaking. Unless specifically provided under law or intended by necessary implication under specific provisions of law, or held in binding judicial precedents; a public sector undertaking cannot legitimately claim a preferential treatment in determination of its tax liabilities.- ITAT Delhi

Team Taxcharcha