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...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that the Assessing Officer could not reopen the assessment for AY 2013-14 merely relying on information from the insight portal without forming an independent opinion based on the assessee's records. The assessee had disclosed and offered to tax the loss from F&O transactions, which was scrutinized and accepted during regular assessment. Reopening on the same issue amounts to a change of opinion, which is impermissible. The reopening lacked tangible material and application of mind, rendering it invalid. The Court decided in favor of the assessee.
The HC held that the Assessing Officer could not reopen the assessment for AY 2013-14 merely relying on information from the insight portal without forming an independent opinion based on the assessee's records. The assessee had disclosed and offered to tax the loss from F&O transactions, which was scrutinized and accepted during regular assessment. Reopening on the same issue amounts to a change of opinion, which is impermissible. The reopening lacked tangible material and application of mind, rendering it invalid. The Court decided in favor of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.