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...
Faceless reassessment under the IT Act was challenged on the ground that the notice under section 148 had to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer and not the jurisdictional officer for alleged non-compliance with section 151A. Without deciding that merits question, the Court directed revival of the pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), permitted the petitioner to raise all grounds including limitation, stayed operation of the assessment order during the appeal, and ordered expeditious disposal.
Faceless reassessment under the IT Act was challenged on the ground that the notice under section 148 had to be issued by the Faceless Assessing Officer and not the jurisdictional officer for alleged non-compliance with section 151A. Without deciding that merits question, the Court directed revival of the pending appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), permitted the petitioner to raise all grounds including limitation, stayed operation of the assessment order during the appeal, and ordered expeditious disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.