Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reassessment notices must be initiated through the faceless assessment framework rather than by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer where algorithm-based random allocation governs reassessment proceedings. A final assessment order issued under the faceless regime does not cure the initial jurisdictional defect. Where the final order is already challenged before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the jurisdictional objection should be raised and considered in that statutory appeal, applying the relevant High Court precedents. The assessment order need not be independently quashed in writ proceedings when the pending appeal can address the objection.
Reassessment notices must be initiated through the faceless assessment framework rather than by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer where algorithm-based random allocation governs reassessment proceedings. A final assessment order issued under the faceless regime does not cure the initial jurisdictional defect. Where the final order is already challenged before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the jurisdictional objection should be raised and considered in that statutory appeal, applying the relevant High Court precedents. The assessment order need not be independently quashed in writ proceedings when the pending appeal can address the objection.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.