Principal Commissioner cannot revise order of Appellate Tribunal ...

Principal Commissioner Overstepped by Revising Tribunal's 100% Tax Deduction Order, Violating Merger and Res Judicata Principles.

July 20, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax HC

Principal Commissioner cannot revise order of Appellate Tribunal as it is contrary to principles of merger, judicial discipline, and res-judicata. The issue before authorities was confined to entitlement of deduction u/s 80IC, whether 100% or 30%. Tribunal settled matter in favor of assessee. Principal Commissioner concluded assessee not entitled to 100% deduction, amounting to revision of Tribunal's order, which is beyond jurisdiction. An authority cannot revise order merged with higher authority's order, as it would lead to chaos and unending litigation. Every litigation must be put to rest at some stage.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Principal Commissioner cannot revise order of Appellate Tribunal ...

Principal Commissioner Overstepped by Revising Tribunal's 100% Tax Deduction Order, Violating Merger and Res Judicata Principles.

July 20, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax HC

You may also like:

Validity of manual revised returns filed - scheme of demerger approved - scheme of arrangement approved by NCLT required Petitioner and Hind Lamps to file revised...

Set off of brought forward losses denied - change in the shareholding pattern of the assessee post merger - Considering the fact that the assessee is a subsidiary of...

Eligibility to make adjustment of excess service tax paid against future service tax liability - Claim of Excess service tax paid due to issuance of revised invoice -...

Doctrine of merger applied to impugned order of Appellate Tribunal imposing penalty on appellant. Held that since Supreme Court's judgment on appeal against Tribunal's...

Quantum of penalty under section 10(A) of the CST Act - The Tribunal after detailed analysis, came to the conclusion that there was mensrea on the part of the petitioner...

Rental income determination - assessee jointly owns 50% house property in Singapore with wife - offered 100% rental income for AY 2014-15 erroneously, rectified in...

Service tax liability cannot be imposed twice on the same transaction. The appellant, as a service recipient, was required to pay 75% of the service tax under the...

100% EOU - Rent-a-Cab service - the service recipient of the appellant, who is a 100% EOU, benefit of non-payment of service tax or refund of the service tax paid, can...

The issue pertained to the validity of filing a revised return after the prescribed time limit. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order, stating that after the...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the revised return of income filed by the assessee cannot be treated as invalid by the Assessing Officer (AO). Since the AO...

Nature of Duty Paid by 100% Export Oriented Units (EOU) - The CESTAT held that while the measure adopted for computing duty paid by 100% EOUs may be based on customs...

100% EOU - Confirmation of demand and levy of penalty - The Tribunal was right in stating that the intention of the assessee was not as that of an honest tax payer as...

100% EOU - Debonding - Demand of differential duty - Penalty - EXIM policy - switching over from 100% EOU Scheme to the EPCG Scheme - - The Tribunal found that the...

100% EOU - Valuation of goods - Calculation of central excise duty on goods cleared from a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) into the domestic tariff area. - The Appellate...

The case involves the classification of services as Management or Business Consultant Services for tax purposes, specifically in relation to merger and acquisitions. The...

Quick Updates: