Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Once the original reassessment orders u/s 148 were quashed, they ceased to exist legally. The rectification order u/s 154 was premised on the quashed orders, which could not be revived or corrected. Section 154 could only be invoked if a valid order capable of rectification existed. Since the original orders were non-existent after being quashed, invoking Section 154 was impermissible. Additionally, the condition u/s 149(1)(b) requiring income escaping assessment to be Rs. 50 lakhs or more was not fulfilled. Consequently, the rectification order was unsustainable and quashed by the High Court.
Once the original reassessment orders u/s 148 were quashed, they ceased to exist legally. The rectification order u/s 154 was premised on the quashed orders, which could not be revived or corrected. Section 154 could only be invoked if a valid order capable of rectification existed. Since the original orders were non-existent after being quashed, invoking Section 154 was impermissible. Additionally, the condition u/s 149(1)(b) requiring income escaping assessment to be Rs. 50 lakhs or more was not fulfilled. Consequently, the rectification order was unsustainable and quashed by the High Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.