Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Rectification u/s 154 application rejected as being time barred - The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention that the rectification application was not time-barred. It held that the clock for the four-year limitation period starts only when the assessee is in receipt of the order to be rectified. Since there was no evidence that the intimation under Section 143(1) was served on the assessee, the limitation period did not begin, and the application was well within the stipulated time.
Rectification u/s 154 application rejected as being time barred - The Appellate Tribunal agreed with the assessee's contention that the rectification application was not time-barred. It held that the clock for the four-year limitation period starts only when the assessee is in receipt of the order to be rectified. Since there was no evidence that the intimation under Section 143(1) was served on the assessee, the limitation period did not begin, and the application was well within the stipulated time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.