Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reassessment completed under section 147 read with section 143(3) without issuance of mandatory notice under section 143(2) was held void by the ITAT. The record, including RTI material, did not show issuance of notice, and section 292BB was held to cure only defects in service, not the complete absence of notice. As the reassessment was a nullity, the consequential revision under section 263 could not survive. The Tribunal also held that the invalidity of the underlying reassessment could be raised in collateral or consequential proceedings even without a separate challenge to the reassessment order.
Reassessment completed under section 147 read with section 143(3) without issuance of mandatory notice under section 143(2) was held void by the ITAT. The record, including RTI material, did not show issuance of notice, and section 292BB was held to cure only defects in service, not the complete absence of notice. As the reassessment was a nullity, the consequential revision under section 263 could not survive. The Tribunal also held that the invalidity of the underlying reassessment could be raised in collateral or consequential proceedings even without a separate challenge to the reassessment order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.