Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
ITAT determined the assessment order under s.148A(d) for AY 2018-19 was invalid due to improper sanctioning authority approval. The order issued on 06.04.2022 received approval from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the statutorily required Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT), as mandated by s.151 for cases beyond three years from assessment year end. Following precedent in Holiday Developers case, ITAT held that PCCIT approval was mandatory since the order fell outside the three-year window. Consequently, both the s.148A(d) order and subsequent s.148 notice were quashed, ruling in assessee's favor due to jurisdictional defect in sanctioning authority.
ITAT determined the assessment order under s.148A(d) for AY 2018-19 was invalid due to improper sanctioning authority approval. The order issued on 06.04.2022 received approval from Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) instead of the statutorily required Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (PCCIT), as mandated by s.151 for cases beyond three years from assessment year end. Following precedent in Holiday Developers case, ITAT held that PCCIT approval was mandatory since the order fell outside the three-year window. Consequently, both the s.148A(d) order and subsequent s.148 notice were quashed, ruling in assessee's favor due to jurisdictional defect in sanctioning authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
