Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Jurisdictional objections in reassessment, including a notice issued in the name of a deceased assessee and alleged procedural non-compliance, must be addressed before merits where they could invalidate the reassessment. Section 250(6) requires the appellate authority to identify each point for determination, record its decision and provide reasons; a general reference to the assessment order does not constitute ground-wise reasoned adjudication. The authority's power to set aside a best-judgment assessment does not remove this obligation. Jurisdictional and legal grounds should be decided through a speaking order before additions are examined on merits, which arise only if the reassessment is valid.
Jurisdictional objections in reassessment, including a notice issued in the name of a deceased assessee and alleged procedural non-compliance, must be addressed before merits where they could invalidate the reassessment. Section 250(6) requires the appellate authority to identify each point for determination, record its decision and provide reasons; a general reference to the assessment order does not constitute ground-wise reasoned adjudication. The authority's power to set aside a best-judgment assessment does not remove this obligation. Jurisdictional and legal grounds should be decided through a speaking order before additions are examined on merits, which arise only if the reassessment is valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.