Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of assessment u/s 153C - Period of limitation - Assessment of income of any other person in search proceedings - The proviso in Section 153C(1) includes not only the question of abatement but also determines the date from which the six-year limitation period should be calculated. - The High court analyzed the relevant legal provisions and case law, emphasizing the need to prevent prejudice to affected parties due to delayed proceedings. It concluded that the assessment orders were indeed barred by limitation, highlighting the unjustified delay in recording satisfaction. Considering the statutory limitation period and lapse of time for completing the assessment, the court quashed the assessment orders.
Validity of assessment u/s 153C - Period of limitation - Assessment of income of any other person in search proceedings - The proviso in Section 153C(1) includes not only the question of abatement but also determines the date from which the six-year limitation period should be calculated. - The High court analyzed the relevant legal provisions and case law, emphasizing the need to prevent prejudice to affected parties due to delayed proceedings. It concluded that the assessment orders were indeed barred by limitation, highlighting the unjustified delay in recording satisfaction. Considering the statutory limitation period and lapse of time for completing the assessment, the court quashed the assessment orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.