Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The court held that the approval granted u/s 151 for reopening the assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The satisfaction arrived at by the concerned officer should be discernible from the sanction order, but the approval order lacked any reasoning or material that weighed for granting approval. Mere appending the expression "Yes I am satisfied" without any indication of examining the material or thought process is insufficient. The exercise appeared ritualistic and formal rather than meaningful. Reasons are the link between material and conclusion, but no such material was present to conclude that the approving authority considered the reasons assigned by the Assessing Officer. Mere repetition of statutory words or rubber-stamping the letter seeking sanction does not satisfy the legal requirement. The approving authority failed to record concurrence satisfactorily, and the use of "Yes, I am satisfied" cannot be considered a valid approval as it does not reflect an independent application of mind. The grant of approval in such a manner is flawed in law. Consequently, the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for issuing notice u/s 148 was held invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
The court held that the approval granted u/s 151 for reopening the assessment u/s 147 was invalid. The satisfaction arrived at by the concerned officer should be discernible from the sanction order, but the approval order lacked any reasoning or material that weighed for granting approval. Mere appending the expression "Yes I am satisfied" without any indication of examining the material or thought process is insufficient. The exercise appeared ritualistic and formal rather than meaningful. Reasons are the link between material and conclusion, but no such material was present to conclude that the approving authority considered the reasons assigned by the Assessing Officer. Mere repetition of statutory words or rubber-stamping the letter seeking sanction does not satisfy the legal requirement. The approving authority failed to record concurrence satisfactorily, and the use of "Yes, I am satisfied" cannot be considered a valid approval as it does not reflect an independent application of mind. The grant of approval in such a manner is flawed in law. Consequently, the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for issuing notice u/s 148 was held invalid, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
