| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3476 (Del-HC) : (2020) 316 CTR 0673 : (2020) 274 TAXMAN 0391 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 245R
Where Section 143 notice was issued on ground that taxable income shown in revised return was less than taxable income shown in original return and large refund was claimed but issue before AAR was whether royalty was taxable in hands of assessee at time of actual receipt, then it could not be said that question was pending under clause (i) of proviso to section 245R(2).
|
Advance ruling - Jurisdiction of AAR - Revised return filed by assessee was selected for scrutiny and section 143(2) notice was issued -
Petition was filed challenging order passed by Authority for Advance Rulings on ground that it was in violation of the jurisdictional bar under proviso to section 245R(2) as revised return filed by assessee was selected for scrutiny and section 143(2) notice was issued. Held:Section 143 notice was issued on ground that taxable income shown in revised return was less than taxable income shown in original return and large refund was claimed but issue before AAR was whether royalty was taxable in hands of assessee at time of actual receipt. AAR held that notice under section 143(2) merely required assessee to produce any evidence, in support of its return. Thus, it could not be said that issue was pending to attract bar under clause (i) of proviso to section 245R(2) and, thus, there was no infirmity in approach adopted by AAR.
REFERRED : Sudhir Chandra Nawn v. WTO & Anr. (1969) 1 SCR 108 : 1968 TaxPub(DT) 0400 (SC) Sage Publications Ltd. U.K. v. DCIT (Int'l Taxation) (2016) 387 ITR 437 (Delhi) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 3991 (Del-HC) Hyosung Corporation v. Authority For Advance Rulings & Anr. (2016) 382 ITR 371 (Delhi) : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 1162 (Del-HC)
FAVOUR : Against the assessee
A.Y. :
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|