Mundra House, 822-A, Shivaju Nagar, Civil Lines, jaipur-302006 9314501680, 9314501791

B.P.Mundra

मानवता से काम करें मन के सारे काम अपने आप हो जायेंगे

इस महीने के इम्पोर्टेंट काम
  • Home
  • GST
  • Cases Income tax
  • MCA
  • Subsidy
  • TDS
  • About Us
  • contact us
  • Login
    • Admin Login
    • Staff Login
    • User Login
  • Loan
  • Apply for job
  • Click Here
  • HOW TO
  • To file ITR for AY 2022-23 kindly give details (and also evidence if yes) of following
  • Categories
    • Articles
    • Authority
    • Benami Transactions (Prohibition)
    • client
    • Constitution of India
    • Finance Act 1994
    • formalities to be completed
    • GST
    • Happiness
    • HOW TO
    • Income Tax
    • Indian Evidence Act 1872
    • Job Application
    • MCA
    • Office system
    • Papers required for filing
    • Principal of mutuality
    • rajasthan public trust
    • Smile
    • Subsidy
    • work report

Ahmedabad Tribunal

B.P.Mundra > Income Tax > Cases Income tax > Court or tribunal > Ahmedabad Tribunal

(→ for subcategory see right ) (for subcategory scroll Below)
  • ITAT AHMEDABAD on Mar 11, 2020 held that 148 Notice issed in ‎the name of dead person. One legal representative participated ‎in proceedings. Raised objection 1st time in appeal. It is ‎procedural mistake rectificable 292B to frame assessment in the ‎name of all legal heirs as per the provisions of law after issue of ‎notice u/s 148 to all legal representatives.‎

  • 11 मार्च 2020 अहमदाबाद ट्रिब्यूनल ने फेसला दिया कि अगर कर निर्धारण अधिकारी धारा 148 का नोटिस मृत व्यक्ति के नाम से दिया है और उसके उत्तराधिकारी नोटिस का जवाब देते हैं और उस समय कोई ऑब्जेक्शन नहीं उठाते हैं और कर निर्धारण अधिकारी उत्तराधिकारी के नाम से एसेसमेंट ऑर्डर करते हैं तो वह नोटिस 148 वैलिड रहेगा लेकिन चूंकि एसेसमेंट ऑर्डर केवल एक उत्तराधिकारी के खिलाफ है इस कारण सेट एसाइड किया गया की यह आर्डर सभी उत्तराधिकारी के खिलाफ किया जावे।

  • On 26th Oct 2018 AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL held that Action u/s 263 can be justified ‎only when twin condition is fulfilled as held by The Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT ‎Vs. Shri D.G. Gopala Gowda i.e. assessment order should be erroneous and it should ‎cause a prejudice to the Revenue. In the instant case Assessee argued the moment ‎addition on account of disallowance of the deprecation would be made to the assessee’s ‎income, it will be allowed as deduction u/s80IA/80IC. Therefore, order of the ‎Commissioner is not sustainable on this issue.

Post navigation

← Previous 1 2

Sub Categories of Ahmedabad Tribunal

  • No categories