Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT Nagpur considered the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. The AO issued notice beyond four years alleging capital gain on "Sale of Vehicles" escaped assessment. The tribunal held that the AO's reasons for reopening were a change of opinion as the issue was already examined during the original assessment. The AO did not prove failure to disclose material facts, as the assessee had provided sale agreements. Without new evidence, the AO lacked jurisdiction u/s 147 after four years. Since no failure to disclose facts was alleged, the reassessment was deemed invalid. Decision favored the assessee. - AO had initially made an addition u/s 68 regarding the sale of vehicles. The re-assessment proceedings attempted to reclassify this under u/s 50 or 41(2), which the Tribunal found to be a mere change of opinion and not permissible.
The ITAT Nagpur considered the validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147. The AO issued notice beyond four years alleging capital gain on "Sale of Vehicles" escaped assessment. The tribunal held that the AO's reasons for reopening were a change of opinion as the issue was already examined during the original assessment. The AO did not prove failure to disclose material facts, as the assessee had provided sale agreements. Without new evidence, the AO lacked jurisdiction u/s 147 after four years. Since no failure to disclose facts was alleged, the reassessment was deemed invalid. Decision favored the assessee. - AO had initially made an addition u/s 68 regarding the sale of vehicles. The re-assessment proceedings attempted to reclassify this under u/s 50 or 41(2), which the Tribunal found to be a mere change of opinion and not permissible.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
