Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The issue pertains to the validity of reopening proceedings against a deceased assessee. It was held that the issuance of a notice u/s 148 of the Act is the foundation for reopening an assessment, and the sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction is that such notice should be issued in the name of the correct person. Issuing a notice to a deceased person is not merely a procedural defect but a condition precedent for the notice's validity. The defect cannot be cured u/s 292BB, as this provision applies when the assessee is aware of the proceedings but takes advantage of defective notices. In cases where the initiation itself is against a deceased person, Section 292BB cannot be invoked. The decision was in favor of the assessee, and the matter was decided by the Appellate Tribunal.
The issue pertains to the validity of reopening proceedings against a deceased assessee. It was held that the issuance of a notice u/s 148 of the Act is the foundation for reopening an assessment, and the sine qua non for acquiring jurisdiction is that such notice should be issued in the name of the correct person. Issuing a notice to a deceased person is not merely a procedural defect but a condition precedent for the notice's validity. The defect cannot be cured u/s 292BB, as this provision applies when the assessee is aware of the proceedings but takes advantage of defective notices. In cases where the initiation itself is against a deceased person, Section 292BB cannot be invoked. The decision was in favor of the assessee, and the matter was decided by the Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.