Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148A(b) - Petitioner claimed that despite certain transactions being booked under the PAN of erstwhile company (amalgamated company) due to an error, they had correctly considered all transactions in their return. - The court found merit in the petitioner's contention regarding the lack of proper application of mind in granting approval under Section 151. They observed discrepancies in the approval process, indicating a failure to review the request and draft order adequately. Consequently, the court deemed it appropriate to quash the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the consequent notice issued under Section 148.
Validity of reopening of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 148A(b) - Petitioner claimed that despite certain transactions being booked under the PAN of erstwhile company (amalgamated company) due to an error, they had correctly considered all transactions in their return. - The court found merit in the petitioner's contention regarding the lack of proper application of mind in granting approval under Section 151. They observed discrepancies in the approval process, indicating a failure to review the request and draft order adequately. Consequently, the court deemed it appropriate to quash the order under Section 148A(d) of the Act and the consequent notice issued under Section 148.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
