Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the assessment order made u/s 143(3) read with Section 260 for the assessment year 2021-22. The petitioner argued that the assessment should have been done in a faceless manner as per the scheme notified on 29th March 2022. However, the court held that the notification invoking Section 151A was for faceless assessment of income escaping assessment u/s 147, and not for regular assessments u/s 143(3). The court observed that Section 144B provides a complete code for faceless assessment, which was not applicable in this case. The Assessing Officer found the purchases from suppliers doubtful, raising questions of fact. The court was disinclined to interfere on such factual issues and dismissed the petition.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the assessment order made u/s 143(3) read with Section 260 for the assessment year 2021-22. The petitioner argued that the assessment should have been done in a faceless manner as per the scheme notified on 29th March 2022. However, the court held that the notification invoking Section 151A was for faceless assessment of income escaping assessment u/s 147, and not for regular assessments u/s 143(3). The court observed that Section 144B provides a complete code for faceless assessment, which was not applicable in this case. The Assessing Officer found the purchases from suppliers doubtful, raising questions of fact. The court was disinclined to interfere on such factual issues and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
