Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Approved resolution plans extinguish unsubmitted pre-approval tax claims, preventing later recovery outside the insolvency process and preserving a cl...
Transfer pricing comparability requires functional alignment and permits working capital adjustment, while APA margins cannot govern non-covered years...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
881 to 900 of 95999 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Seized cash cannot be automatically released after 120 days u/s 132B's second proviso. This proviso applies only after the Assessing Officer determines the existing liability and approves asset return. Without such determination, the second proviso does not apply. The first proviso lacks a timeline, while the second proviso requires the AO's assessment. Despite disclosures and applications, the AO did not decide on liability or asset return here. The High Court correctly held that Section 132B's second proviso does not mandate automatic release after 120 days. However, since cash was seized from petitioners' lockers after prior disclosure, authorities must decide on their application with a reasoned order within four weeks, potentially refunding with interest if the source is satisfactorily explained u/s 132B(4)(a)&(b).
Seized cash cannot be automatically released after 120 days u/s 132B's second proviso. This proviso applies only after the Assessing Officer determines the existing liability and approves asset return. Without such determination, the second proviso does not apply. The first proviso lacks a timeline, while the second proviso requires the AO's assessment. Despite disclosures and applications, the AO did not decide on liability or asset return here. The High Court correctly held that Section 132B's second proviso does not mandate automatic release after 120 days. However, since cash was seized from petitioners' lockers after prior disclosure, authorities must decide on their application with a reasoned order within four weeks, potentially refunding with interest if the source is satisfactorily explained u/s 132B(4)(a)&(b).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
