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...
Assessment u/s 147 versus 153C - choice of correct course of assessment. The assessee's name featured in the list of beneficiaries of accommodation entries by way of share capital premium/loan. The Assessing Officer did not record a satisfaction note or forward it to the assessee's Assessing Officer, failing to satisfy the conditions for reopening assessment u/s 153C. Recourse to Section 147 based on information received by the Investigation Wing was not precluded. The search in Jain Brothers' case was conducted on 14.09.2010. Section 153C(1) then allowed assessment/reassessment of income u/s 153C only if assets, documents, or books belonged to the person other than the searched person. On 12.03.2013, when the Assessing Officer received information, reassessment u/s 153C was impermissible. The amendment by Finance Act, 2015, applicable to searches before 01.06.2015, did not impact this case. The jurisdictional condition for the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction u/s 153C was not satisfied, aligning with Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. The appeal is allowed, and the assessee's appeal is restored before the ITAT for consideration on other grounds.
Assessment u/s 147 versus 153C - choice of correct course of assessment. The assessee's name featured in the list of beneficiaries of accommodation entries by way of share capital premium/loan. The Assessing Officer did not record a satisfaction note or forward it to the assessee's Assessing Officer, failing to satisfy the conditions for reopening assessment u/s 153C. Recourse to Section 147 based on information received by the Investigation Wing was not precluded. The search in Jain Brothers' case was conducted on 14.09.2010. Section 153C(1) then allowed assessment/reassessment of income u/s 153C only if assets, documents, or books belonged to the person other than the searched person. On 12.03.2013, when the Assessing Officer received information, reassessment u/s 153C was impermissible. The amendment by Finance Act, 2015, applicable to searches before 01.06.2015, did not impact this case. The jurisdictional condition for the Assessing Officer to assume jurisdiction u/s 153C was not satisfied, aligning with Abhisar Buildwell (P.) Ltd. The appeal is allowed, and the assessee's appeal is restored before the ITAT for consideration on other grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
