Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Reopening of assessment - reason to believe or reason to suspect - The ITAT examined the "reasons recorded" by the AO for reopening the assessment. It noted that the AO relied on the information provided by the SEBI order, which alleged manipulative trading practices by certain entities, including the director of the assessee company. However, the court observed that the name of the assessee company itself was not listed among the entities restrained by SEBI. - The Tribunal emphasized that for the reopening of an assessment, the AO must have "reasons to believe" that income has escaped assessment, not merely "reasons to suspect." It found that the information provided by the SEBI order could only trigger "reasons to suspect" and did not meet the legal requirement for reopening.
Reopening of assessment - reason to believe or reason to suspect - The ITAT examined the "reasons recorded" by the AO for reopening the assessment. It noted that the AO relied on the information provided by the SEBI order, which alleged manipulative trading practices by certain entities, including the director of the assessee company. However, the court observed that the name of the assessee company itself was not listed among the entities restrained by SEBI. - The Tribunal emphasized that for the reopening of an assessment, the AO must have "reasons to believe" that income has escaped assessment, not merely "reasons to suspect." It found that the information provided by the SEBI order could only trigger "reasons to suspect" and did not meet the legal requirement for reopening.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
