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 High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to the reopening of assessment u/s 147, citing the petitioner's delayed compliance with notice u/s 148 and failure to challenge the re-assessment notice or reasons for reassessment. The Court held that the petitioner's failure to avail the statutory appeal remedy precluded invoking writ jurisdiction. The Court noted factual issues requiring adjudication beyond Article 226 scope, such as delay in statutory audit and compliance with Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner's contention on the doctrine of merger was deemed misconceived. The Court refrained from opining on audit merits, urging the petitioner to pursue appellate remedy. The Court dismissed the writ applications, advising the petitioner to challenge the orders before the appellate authority, with the possibility of condoning the limitation period for filing appeals.
The High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to the reopening of assessment u/s 147, citing the petitioner's delayed compliance with notice u/s 148 and failure to challenge the re-assessment notice or reasons for reassessment. The Court held that the petitioner's failure to avail the statutory appeal remedy precluded invoking writ jurisdiction. The Court noted factual issues requiring adjudication beyond Article 226 scope, such as delay in statutory audit and compliance with Co-operative Societies Act. The petitioner's contention on the doctrine of merger was deemed misconceived. The Court refrained from opining on audit merits, urging the petitioner to pursue appellate remedy. The Court dismissed the writ applications, advising the petitioner to challenge the orders before the appellate authority, with the possibility of condoning the limitation period for filing appeals.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
