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...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Collateral challenge to the jurisdiction of reassessment proceedings was held maintainable in an appeal against penalty where the penalty was founded on that reassessment. After three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, approval for notice under section 148 had to be obtained from the authority specified in section 151(ii); approval by the PCIT was insufficient. Because the notice under section 148 and the reassessment order were issued with the wrong sanction, the reassessment was void and the consequential penalty under section 271E could not survive.
Collateral challenge to the jurisdiction of reassessment proceedings was held maintainable in an appeal against penalty where the penalty was founded on that reassessment. After three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, approval for notice under section 148 had to be obtained from the authority specified in section 151(ii); approval by the PCIT was insufficient. Because the notice under section 148 and the reassessment order were issued with the wrong sanction, the reassessment was void and the consequential penalty under section 271E could not survive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.