Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
The ITAT Raipur held that an order passed in the name of a deceased assessee was invalid as legal heirs failed to disclose the death. Deduction u/s. 54F was denied as the deceased had not utilized sale proceeds for new property within the specified time. Section 159 requires compliance when an assessee dies during proceedings. Citing Dalumal Shyamumal case, the Tribunal declared the assessment order a nullity and directed a proper assessment. The order in the present case was deemed defective and null, criticizing the legal heirs for non-disclosure. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration with legal heirs' involvement. Legal heirs must be given a chance to be heard. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
The ITAT Raipur held that an order passed in the name of a deceased assessee was invalid as legal heirs failed to disclose the death. Deduction u/s. 54F was denied as the deceased had not utilized sale proceeds for new property within the specified time. Section 159 requires compliance when an assessee dies during proceedings. Citing Dalumal Shyamumal case, the Tribunal declared the assessment order a nullity and directed a proper assessment. The order in the present case was deemed defective and null, criticizing the legal heirs for non-disclosure. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh consideration with legal heirs' involvement. Legal heirs must be given a chance to be heard. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
