Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid where it was based on the same material already examined in the original scrutiny, with no new tangible information, and on an incorrect factual premise that separate research and development accounts were not maintained. The Tribunal treated this as a mere change of opinion after four years and held the jurisdictional assumption bad in law. On merits, it found no multiple deduction: the disputed depreciation was already included in research and development expenditure and had been added back in the income computation, so no further disallowance survived. The appellate authority also could not uphold denial of weighted deduction beyond the reassessment order without enhancement notice.
Reopening of assessment under section 147 was invalid where it was based on the same material already examined in the original scrutiny, with no new tangible information, and on an incorrect factual premise that separate research and development accounts were not maintained. The Tribunal treated this as a mere change of opinion after four years and held the jurisdictional assumption bad in law. On merits, it found no multiple deduction: the disputed depreciation was already included in research and development expenditure and had been added back in the income computation, so no further disallowance survived. The appellate authority also could not uphold denial of weighted deduction beyond the reassessment order without enhancement notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
