Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Validity of assessment order passed u/s 144C - The ITAT held that the order issued by the AO was a final assessment order disguised as a draft, violating section 144C of the Act. This section mandates that a draft order must be issued first, allowing the assessee to file objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) before finalizing the assessment. The inclusion of penalty notices and demand under section 156 alongside the draft/final order further supported the Tribunal's conclusion that the order was final. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal by the assessee was to be allowed and the orders by the lower authorities were declared non est (non-existent for legal purposes).
Validity of assessment order passed u/s 144C - The ITAT held that the order issued by the AO was a final assessment order disguised as a draft, violating section 144C of the Act. This section mandates that a draft order must be issued first, allowing the assessee to file objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) before finalizing the assessment. The inclusion of penalty notices and demand under section 156 alongside the draft/final order further supported the Tribunal's conclusion that the order was final. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal by the assessee was to be allowed and the orders by the lower authorities were declared non est (non-existent for legal purposes).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.