Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
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.