Tax determination against deceased proprietor invalid where no notice to legal representative; appeal rejected without addressing jurisdictional defec...
Revocation of GST registration and permission to file blocked returns; conditional defreezing of bank accounts after security and instalment applicati...
Right to access seized electronic evidence: impugned adjudication treated as additional show cause notice, remand for fresh hearing and return of mate...
Revisability of return invalidation communications under tax procedure affirmed, impugned non revisional finding quashed and matter remitted for fresh...
Reassessment after four years was impermissible because the recorded reasons did not establish any failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The information relied on for reopening-the nature of the business, licence arrangement, Indian company status, shareholding structure and related particulars-was already disclosed in the return, annual report, tax audit report and Form 3CEB, and the reasons merely asserted nondisclosure without identifying any specific undisclosed fact. On the section 80-IA issue, the reasons were also found erroneous: the relevant enterprise was the container terminal undertaking owned by the Indian assessee, and the Revenue had overlooked the assessee's own development activity and installation of terminal equipment. The reopening notice and consequential orders were quashed.
Reassessment after four years was impermissible because the recorded reasons did not establish any failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The information relied on for reopening-the nature of the business, licence arrangement, Indian company status, shareholding structure and related particulars-was already disclosed in the return, annual report, tax audit report and Form 3CEB, and the reasons merely asserted nondisclosure without identifying any specific undisclosed fact. On the section 80-IA issue, the reasons were also found erroneous: the relevant enterprise was the container terminal undertaking owned by the Indian assessee, and the Revenue had overlooked the assessee's own development activity and installation of terminal equipment. The reopening notice and consequential orders were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.