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...
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Validity of faceless assessment challenged due to non-compliance with Section 151A - notices issued by Joint Assessing Officer (JAO) instead of Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). High Court held that JAO lacked jurisdiction to issue notices u/s 148, particularly in view of Section 151A read with Central Government notification dated 29 March 2022. Relying on Hexaware Technologies Ltd. case, the Court ruled the impugned notices illegal and invalid as JAO had no jurisdiction. Petition allowed in favor of assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.