Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 96332 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 reopening of assessment u/s 147 by the Assessing Officer (AO) was without jurisdiction and amounted to a mere change of opinion. The issue of unsecured loans availed by the petitioner from Phulchand Export Pvt. Ltd. was scrutinized during the regular assessment proceedings, and the AO was satisfied with the details provided by the petitioner. The mere fact that Phulchand Export Pvt. Ltd. incurred losses cannot be grounds to doubt the creditworthiness and genuineness of the unsecured loan. Once an issue is scrutinized during regular assessment, the same issue cannot be considered for reopening the assessment, as it would amount to a change of opinion. The impugned notice was held to be issued without jurisdiction, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
The High Court held that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 by the Assessing Officer (AO) was without jurisdiction and amounted to a mere change of opinion. The issue of unsecured loans availed by the petitioner from Phulchand Export Pvt. Ltd. was scrutinized during the regular assessment proceedings, and the AO was satisfied with the details provided by the petitioner. The mere fact that Phulchand Export Pvt. Ltd. incurred losses cannot be grounds to doubt the creditworthiness and genuineness of the unsecured loan. Once an issue is scrutinized during regular assessment, the same issue cannot be considered for reopening the assessment, as it would amount to a change of opinion. The impugned notice was held to be issued without jurisdiction, and the decision was in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.