Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Once the principal grounds on which reassessment was proposed are dropped, no further additions can be made even by taking recourse to Explanation 3. There is an indelible connection between Section 148A(b) and Section 148A(d) of the Act, which is not impacted by Explanation 3. The validity of initiation of reassessment must be independently evaluated and cannot be confused with the power ultimately available to the Assessing Officer once an assessment has been validly reopened. Explanation 3 comes into play only after it is found that the power to reassess has been validly invoked. It cannot be read as enabling the Assessing Officer to deviate from the original reasons for initiating action u/s 147/148, nor can it empower the officer to improve upon, supplement or supplant those reasons. Therefore, once the issue which formed the subject matter of the notice u/s 148 was dropped, no further additions could have been made thereafter.
Once the principal grounds on which reassessment was proposed are dropped, no further additions can be made even by taking recourse to Explanation 3. There is an indelible connection between Section 148A(b) and Section 148A(d) of the Act, which is not impacted by Explanation 3. The validity of initiation of reassessment must be independently evaluated and cannot be confused with the power ultimately available to the Assessing Officer once an assessment has been validly reopened. Explanation 3 comes into play only after it is found that the power to reassess has been validly invoked. It cannot be read as enabling the Assessing Officer to deviate from the original reasons for initiating action u/s 147/148, nor can it empower the officer to improve upon, supplement or supplant those reasons. Therefore, once the issue which formed the subject matter of the notice u/s 148 was dropped, no further additions could have been made thereafter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
