Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.