Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Faceless reassessment under section 147 read with section 144B was treated as a best judgment reassessment where the assessee did not comply with section 142(1) notices and did not properly respond to section 144 show-cause notices. On that footing, the proviso to section 251(1)(a), effective from 01.10.2024, permitted the appellate authority to set aside the assessment and remand it for fresh adjudication. The remand was upheld because the assessing officer had not verified the material and additional evidence had been filed in appeal, making de novo assessment with opportunity to the assessee justified. The Revenue's objection was rejected and the reassessment was sent back for fresh disposal.
Faceless reassessment under section 147 read with section 144B was treated as a best judgment reassessment where the assessee did not comply with section 142(1) notices and did not properly respond to section 144 show-cause notices. On that footing, the proviso to section 251(1)(a), effective from 01.10.2024, permitted the appellate authority to set aside the assessment and remand it for fresh adjudication. The remand was upheld because the assessing officer had not verified the material and additional evidence had been filed in appeal, making de novo assessment with opportunity to the assessee justified. The Revenue's objection was rejected and the reassessment was sent back for fresh disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
