Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - An order in the name of dead person - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged that the penalty order was indeed issued in the name of a deceased assessee. Despite being informed about the death of the assessee, the CIT(A) failed to consider this fact and passed the order in the name of the deceased person. Citing relevant legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that penalty orders cannot be passed on deceased individuals and that notices should be issued to their legal heirs. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the penalty order issued by the CIT(A).
Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - An order in the name of dead person - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged that the penalty order was indeed issued in the name of a deceased assessee. Despite being informed about the death of the assessee, the CIT(A) failed to consider this fact and passed the order in the name of the deceased person. Citing relevant legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that penalty orders cannot be passed on deceased individuals and that notices should be issued to their legal heirs. Therefore, the Tribunal quashed the penalty order issued by the CIT(A).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
