Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment orders issued u/s 153C for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and void ab initio. The amendment to Section 153C with effect from April 1, 2017, had prospective effect, clarified by CBDT Circular 2/2018. The AO could only reopen assessments for the preceding six years from the year of satisfaction recorded on September 26, 2018, i.e., assessment years 2013-14 to 2018-19. Consequently, the impugned assessment orders for 2011-12 and 2012-13 were quashed. Regarding the reopening of assessments of other persons u/s 153C, the Tribunal held that the AO failed to record valid satisfaction year-wise and narrate specific documents relied upon for initiating proceedings. The satisfaction note lacked details of information and failed to establish a direct correlation between the incriminating material and the relevant assessment years. The addition of 1% representing income from commission and bank statement credits/debits was deleted due to the absence of valid satisfaction recorded, following the precedent in M/s Marconi Infratech.
The Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment orders issued u/s 153C for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (AO) and void ab initio. The amendment to Section 153C with effect from April 1, 2017, had prospective effect, clarified by CBDT Circular 2/2018. The AO could only reopen assessments for the preceding six years from the year of satisfaction recorded on September 26, 2018, i.e., assessment years 2013-14 to 2018-19. Consequently, the impugned assessment orders for 2011-12 and 2012-13 were quashed. Regarding the reopening of assessments of other persons u/s 153C, the Tribunal held that the AO failed to record valid satisfaction year-wise and narrate specific documents relied upon for initiating proceedings. The satisfaction note lacked details of information and failed to establish a direct correlation between the incriminating material and the relevant assessment years. The addition of 1% representing income from commission and bank statement credits/debits was deleted due to the absence of valid satisfaction recorded, following the precedent in M/s Marconi Infratech.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.