Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The crux of the matter revolves around the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The critical issue is whether there existed any new 'tangible material' or fresh 'information' in the possession of the AO to justify reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. The Tribunal, after examining the Supreme Court's judgment in Kelvinator of India Ltd. and the assessee's own case, concluded that there was no new 'tangible material' or fresh 'information' available with the AO. Consequently, the Tribunal held that if the AO assumes jurisdiction u/s 147 without such material or information, it would render the reassessment proceedings a nullity, liable to be set aside. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the Revenue had an opportunity to invoke issues u/s 263 before reopening but failed to do so. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee and set aside the reopening proceedings.
The crux of the matter revolves around the validity of reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO). The critical issue is whether there existed any new 'tangible material' or fresh 'information' in the possession of the AO to justify reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act. The Tribunal, after examining the Supreme Court's judgment in Kelvinator of India Ltd. and the assessee's own case, concluded that there was no new 'tangible material' or fresh 'information' available with the AO. Consequently, the Tribunal held that if the AO assumes jurisdiction u/s 147 without such material or information, it would render the reassessment proceedings a nullity, liable to be set aside. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that the Revenue had an opportunity to invoke issues u/s 263 before reopening but failed to do so. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal decided in favor of the assessee and set aside the reopening proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
