Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act did not confer ownership for depreciation where there was no written and registered transfer instrument, so the assessee could not treat the properties as firm assets or claim depreciation on that basis. The assessment was also not vitiated by natural justice grounds because the show-cause process and repeated notices already covered the relevant factual basis, and the shift from unexplained investment to unexplained credit was treated as a consequence of the same inquiry. Having rejected the jurisdictional and procedural objections, the Court declined to examine the merits of the unexplained credit dispute in writ jurisdiction and relegated the assessee to the statutory appellate remedy.
Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act did not confer ownership for depreciation where there was no written and registered transfer instrument, so the assessee could not treat the properties as firm assets or claim depreciation on that basis. The assessment was also not vitiated by natural justice grounds because the show-cause process and repeated notices already covered the relevant factual basis, and the shift from unexplained investment to unexplained credit was treated as a consequence of the same inquiry. Having rejected the jurisdictional and procedural objections, the Court declined to examine the merits of the unexplained credit dispute in writ jurisdiction and relegated the assessee to the statutory appellate remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.