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...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessment issued in the name of an amalgamated entity that has ceased to exist is an incurable jurisdictional defect and void from inception. Where the Assessing Officer knew of the amalgamation, the successor entity's participation cannot validate the assessment or cure it as a procedural irregularity under section 292B. Supreme Court precedent treats such assessment as a substantive illegality affecting jurisdiction. Consequently, the assessment against the erstwhile bank was quashed, and the merits of the additions were not examined.
Assessment issued in the name of an amalgamated entity that has ceased to exist is an incurable jurisdictional defect and void from inception. Where the Assessing Officer knew of the amalgamation, the successor entity's participation cannot validate the assessment or cure it as a procedural irregularity under section 292B. Supreme Court precedent treats such assessment as a substantive illegality affecting jurisdiction. Consequently, the assessment against the erstwhile bank was quashed, and the merits of the additions were not examined.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.