Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
A pure legal challenge to a reassessment notice was admitted in cross objection because it went to the root of jurisdiction and had already been raised below. On merits, the ITAT held that a reopening notice issued beyond six years from the end of the relevant assessment year was time-barred. Applying the jurisdictional High Court view, it ruled that the extended reassessment limitation under the amended law operates prospectively and does not revive cases where the old six-year period had already expired. The notice was quashed, the reassessment was invalidated, the assessee's cross objection was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal on merits failed.
A pure legal challenge to a reassessment notice was admitted in cross objection because it went to the root of jurisdiction and had already been raised below. On merits, the ITAT held that a reopening notice issued beyond six years from the end of the relevant assessment year was time-barred. Applying the jurisdictional High Court view, it ruled that the extended reassessment limitation under the amended law operates prospectively and does not revive cases where the old six-year period had already expired. The notice was quashed, the reassessment was invalidated, the assessee's cross objection was allowed, and the Revenue's appeal on merits failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
