Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 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 High Court quashed the reassessment order due to procedural defects. The Assessing Officer failed to dispose of the assessee's objections through a speaking order after issuing notice u/s 147, violating principles established in GKN Driveshafts case. The court rejected the department's attempt to rely on reasons mentioned in the approval granted u/s 151, as it was impermissible after passing the assessment order. The Assessing Officer adopted different approaches, furnishing different reasons to the assessee and Joint Commissioner, and proceeded without disposing of objections, acting against revenue's interest. The court questioned the Assessing Officer's reckless actions leading to potential revenue loss and sought scrutiny of such officers' performance by higher authorities.
The High Court quashed the reassessment order due to procedural defects. The Assessing Officer failed to dispose of the assessee's objections through a speaking order after issuing notice u/s 147, violating principles established in GKN Driveshafts case. The court rejected the department's attempt to rely on reasons mentioned in the approval granted u/s 151, as it was impermissible after passing the assessment order. The Assessing Officer adopted different approaches, furnishing different reasons to the assessee and Joint Commissioner, and proceeded without disposing of objections, acting against revenue's interest. The court questioned the Assessing Officer's reckless actions leading to potential revenue loss and sought scrutiny of such officers' performance by higher authorities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
