Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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.