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 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95673 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 held that the reassessment notice issued beyond the period of limitation was invalid and without jurisdiction. The impugned notice itself was illegal, and there was no foundation for an assessment order based on a time-barred notice u/s 148. The assessment order passed u/s 148A(d) was also barred by limitation as per the first proviso to Section 149. The inherent illegality of the time-barred notice u/s 148 percolated into the assessment order, rendering it an incurable defect. The Assessing Officer proceeded without jurisdiction, possibly applying the amended provisions of Section 149 erroneously. An order that is void ab initio cannot be saved, and acquiescence to an illegal order cannot render it legal. The Court allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that giving effect to an illegal and void order cannot be permitted.
The High Court held that the reassessment notice issued beyond the period of limitation was invalid and without jurisdiction. The impugned notice itself was illegal, and there was no foundation for an assessment order based on a time-barred notice u/s 148. The assessment order passed u/s 148A(d) was also barred by limitation as per the first proviso to Section 149. The inherent illegality of the time-barred notice u/s 148 percolated into the assessment order, rendering it an incurable defect. The Assessing Officer proceeded without jurisdiction, possibly applying the amended provisions of Section 149 erroneously. An order that is void ab initio cannot be saved, and acquiescence to an illegal order cannot render it legal. The Court allowed the assessee's appeal, holding that giving effect to an illegal and void order cannot be permitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.