Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reopening of assessment v/s assessment u/s 153C - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged the argument presented by the appellant and emphasized the importance of applying Section 153C when incriminating material pertaining to a person other than the searched party is found. Citing relevant judicial precedents, including decisions from the Supreme Court and High Courts, the Tribunal concluded that the AO should have initiated proceedings under Section 153C instead of Section 147. As the AO failed to present any additional information beyond the seized documents, the Tribunal deemed the assessment order void-ab-initio and upheld the appellant's contention regarding the invalidity of the notice issued under Section 148.
Reopening of assessment v/s assessment u/s 153C - The Appellate Tribunal acknowledged the argument presented by the appellant and emphasized the importance of applying Section 153C when incriminating material pertaining to a person other than the searched party is found. Citing relevant judicial precedents, including decisions from the Supreme Court and High Courts, the Tribunal concluded that the AO should have initiated proceedings under Section 153C instead of Section 147. As the AO failed to present any additional information beyond the seized documents, the Tribunal deemed the assessment order void-ab-initio and upheld the appellant's contention regarding the invalidity of the notice issued under Section 148.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.