Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
Terminal gate verification for transshipment containers shifts to operators, while Customs controls and discrepancy reporting requirements remain mand...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 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" ?
Assessment u/s 144C - Period of limitation - The Ld. CIT-DR argued that the delay was due to the assessee's failure to participate in the verification process as directed by the DRP. However, the Tribunal noted that sub-section (8) of section 144C precludes the DRP from setting aside any proposed variation or issuing any direction for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. The AO was mandated to complete the assessment within the specified time limit without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - The Tribunal concluded that the final assessment order passed by the AO was barred by limitation and, therefore, null in the eyes of law.
Assessment u/s 144C - Period of limitation - The Ld. CIT-DR argued that the delay was due to the assessee's failure to participate in the verification process as directed by the DRP. However, the Tribunal noted that sub-section (8) of section 144C precludes the DRP from setting aside any proposed variation or issuing any direction for further enquiry and passing of the assessment order. The AO was mandated to complete the assessment within the specified time limit without providing any further opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - The Tribunal concluded that the final assessment order passed by the AO was barred by limitation and, therefore, null in the eyes of law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.