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 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 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
