Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case involves the reopening of assessment u/s 147 to determine if the assessee is a non-filer. Reopening was based on a survey operation at a hotel owned by the wife of the HUF's Karta. The assessee's original return filing status was not mentioned in the reasons recorded by the AO, leading to an invalid assumption of jurisdiction u/s 148. Citing relevant case law, including Gaurav Joshi, 'Sagar Enterprises', 'Fortune Metaliks Ltd.', 'Monika Rani', and 'Baba Kartar Singh Dukku Education Trust', the Tribunal held that incorrect facts regarding return filing render the jurisdiction u/s 148 invalid due to lack of independent assessment by the AO. Decision favors the assessee.
The case involves the reopening of assessment u/s 147 to determine if the assessee is a non-filer. Reopening was based on a survey operation at a hotel owned by the wife of the HUF's Karta. The assessee's original return filing status was not mentioned in the reasons recorded by the AO, leading to an invalid assumption of jurisdiction u/s 148. Citing relevant case law, including Gaurav Joshi, 'Sagar Enterprises', 'Fortune Metaliks Ltd.', 'Monika Rani', and 'Baba Kartar Singh Dukku Education Trust', the Tribunal held that incorrect facts regarding return filing render the jurisdiction u/s 148 invalid due to lack of independent assessment by the AO. Decision favors the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.