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...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings under s.147 initiated after four years on multiple grounds. The proceedings lacked jurisdiction as the reasons for reopening failed to specify any non-disclosure of material facts by the assessee as required by the first proviso to s.147. The Court noted discrepancies between reasons in the draft assessment order and those annexed to the reply affidavit. Additionally, the "guarantee fees" issue was already pending before the Tribunal, invoking the third proviso to s.147 which bars reassessment on matters under appellate consideration. The Court emphasized that since the issue had been examined and added in the original assessment, there was no income that had "escaped assessment," rendering the proceedings jurisdictionally defective.
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings under s.147 initiated after four years on multiple grounds. The proceedings lacked jurisdiction as the reasons for reopening failed to specify any non-disclosure of material facts by the assessee as required by the first proviso to s.147. The Court noted discrepancies between reasons in the draft assessment order and those annexed to the reply affidavit. Additionally, the "guarantee fees" issue was already pending before the Tribunal, invoking the third proviso to s.147 which bars reassessment on matters under appellate consideration. The Court emphasized that since the issue had been examined and added in the original assessment, there was no income that had "escaped assessment," rendering the proceedings jurisdictionally defective.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
