Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court examined the validity of reassessment notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act by the Joint Assistant Commissioner (JAC) in light of the Faceless Assessment Scheme formulated u/s 151A. The key points are: The Act allows reassessment based on information from Risk Management System (RMS), audit objections, information from other countries, information u/s 135A schemes, or orders of Tribunals/Courts. The JAC can form an opinion based on such information and initiate reassessment proceedings u/s 148A. Information gathered during searches/surveys is also deemed as "information" for reassessment purposes under Explanation 2 to Section 148. The Faceless Assessment Scheme segregates the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the JAC from the actual faceless assessment by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The JAC examines information from RMS/other sources and forms an opinion on reassessment, while the NFAC conducts the actual faceless assessment through automated allocation. Rendering the JAC's powers redundant under the faceless scheme would conflict with beneficial construction principles and undermine provisions for comprehensive data analysis and informed decision-making. The High Court upheld the validity of notices issued by the JAC, observing a harmonious distribution of functions between the JAC and NF.
The High Court examined the validity of reassessment notices issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act by the Joint Assistant Commissioner (JAC) in light of the Faceless Assessment Scheme formulated u/s 151A. The key points are: The Act allows reassessment based on information from Risk Management System (RMS), audit objections, information from other countries, information u/s 135A schemes, or orders of Tribunals/Courts. The JAC can form an opinion based on such information and initiate reassessment proceedings u/s 148A. Information gathered during searches/surveys is also deemed as "information" for reassessment purposes under Explanation 2 to Section 148. The Faceless Assessment Scheme segregates the initiation of reassessment proceedings by the JAC from the actual faceless assessment by the National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC). The JAC examines information from RMS/other sources and forms an opinion on reassessment, while the NFAC conducts the actual faceless assessment through automated allocation. Rendering the JAC's powers redundant under the faceless scheme would conflict with beneficial construction principles and undermine provisions for comprehensive data analysis and informed decision-making. The High Court upheld the validity of notices issued by the JAC, observing a harmonious distribution of functions between the JAC and NF.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
