Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Validity of Faceless assessment u/s 144 r.w.s.144B - The High Court observed that the impugned order indeed failed to comply with the prescribed procedure under Section 144B of the Act. The absence of a proceeding shifting the assessment from the Central Assessment Circle to the regular assessment circle, as well as the failure to issue notices u/s 143(2) and 144B(1)(iii) of the Act, rendered the order invalid. The High Court observed that the combination of show cause notice and draft assessment order into a single document was procedurally incorrect. The court referenced a previous ruling that such a combination was impermissible, undermining the statutory framework designed to ensure transparency and accountability in assessments.
Validity of Faceless assessment u/s 144 r.w.s.144B - The High Court observed that the impugned order indeed failed to comply with the prescribed procedure under Section 144B of the Act. The absence of a proceeding shifting the assessment from the Central Assessment Circle to the regular assessment circle, as well as the failure to issue notices u/s 143(2) and 144B(1)(iii) of the Act, rendered the order invalid. The High Court observed that the combination of show cause notice and draft assessment order into a single document was procedurally incorrect. The court referenced a previous ruling that such a combination was impermissible, undermining the statutory framework designed to ensure transparency and accountability in assessments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
