Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
Charitable registration turns on predominant purpose and genuine activities, while incidental fees and related-party rent require supporting adverse m...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
