Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
The High Court examined the validity of an assessment order issued without offering a personal hearing, deeming it a breach of natural justice. The case was transferred from the National Faceless Assessment Center to the jurisdictional AO u/s 144B(8). The respondent rejected the petitioner's request for a hearing via video conference due to purported lack of functionality, contrary to provisions in section 144B and a CBDT circular. The court found the respondent's claim baseless as the circular mandated a hearing either via video conference or in a designated area. The petitioner's right to a hearing was upheld, dismissing the respondent's argument of alternative appeal options. The assessment order was annulled, and the matter was remanded for a proper hearing in line with the CBDT circular.
The High Court examined the validity of an assessment order issued without offering a personal hearing, deeming it a breach of natural justice. The case was transferred from the National Faceless Assessment Center to the jurisdictional AO u/s 144B(8). The respondent rejected the petitioner's request for a hearing via video conference due to purported lack of functionality, contrary to provisions in section 144B and a CBDT circular. The court found the respondent's claim baseless as the circular mandated a hearing either via video conference or in a designated area. The petitioner's right to a hearing was upheld, dismissing the respondent's argument of alternative appeal options. The assessment order was annulled, and the matter was remanded for a proper hearing in line with the CBDT circular.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
