Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95715 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 held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment u/s 147 were vague, based on borrowed satisfaction without application of mind, and lacked a nexus with the material available. The allegation of availing accommodation entries was not substantiated with prima facie evidence or opinion regarding escapement of income. The court found non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer, particularly regarding the alleged accommodation entry from Mahavir Sales Corporation, which the assessee had denied. Relying on precedents, the court reiterated that the Assessing Officer must confine to the recorded reasons for reopening and cannot refer to other facts or inferences. Consequently, the reopening of assessment was held invalid, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
The High Court held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for reopening the assessment u/s 147 were vague, based on borrowed satisfaction without application of mind, and lacked a nexus with the material available. The allegation of availing accommodation entries was not substantiated with prima facie evidence or opinion regarding escapement of income. The court found non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer, particularly regarding the alleged accommodation entry from Mahavir Sales Corporation, which the assessee had denied. Relying on precedents, the court reiterated that the Assessing Officer must confine to the recorded reasons for reopening and cannot refer to other facts or inferences. Consequently, the reopening of assessment was held invalid, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
