Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Validity of Reassessment proceedings - notice issued in the course of the reassessment proceedings not served on the assessee - The High Court examined the evidence presented, including copies of notices and postal tracking reports. It noted that all notices appeared to have been dispatched to the assessee but returned to the sender, the assessing officer. Despite this, the officer claimed the notices were served. The Court held that the mere dispatch of the assessment order to the same address did not prove due service of preceding notices. - Consequently, it set aside the assessment order and directed the petitioner to file detailed objections within a specified timeframe. The Court also allowed the assessing authority to reevaluate the issue of the firm's existence independently.
Validity of Reassessment proceedings - notice issued in the course of the reassessment proceedings not served on the assessee - The High Court examined the evidence presented, including copies of notices and postal tracking reports. It noted that all notices appeared to have been dispatched to the assessee but returned to the sender, the assessing officer. Despite this, the officer claimed the notices were served. The Court held that the mere dispatch of the assessment order to the same address did not prove due service of preceding notices. - Consequently, it set aside the assessment order and directed the petitioner to file detailed objections within a specified timeframe. The Court also allowed the assessing authority to reevaluate the issue of the firm's existence independently.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.