Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The High Court held that the final assessment order passed by the authority exceeded the scope of the show cause notice by determining a higher tax liability than alleged in the notice. This violated Section 75(7) of the Act, which mandates that the final order cannot travel beyond the allegations in the show cause notice. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the competent authority to re-hear the matter, consider all objections, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
The High Court held that the final assessment order passed by the authority exceeded the scope of the show cause notice by determining a higher tax liability than alleged in the notice. This violated Section 75(7) of the Act, which mandates that the final order cannot travel beyond the allegations in the show cause notice. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned assessment order and directed the competent authority to re-hear the matter, consider all objections, and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. The writ petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
