Political contribution deductions require assessee-specific proof before cash-back allegations can justify disallowance or unexplained-money additions...
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against a dissolved partnership firm. The Assessing Officer had erroneously issued notice under s.148A(b) and passed order under s.148A(d) in the name of the partnership firm that had been dissolved effective April 1, 2017. The Court held that such proceedings were untenable, particularly since the petitioner had provided all relevant information including the dissolution deed in response to the show cause notice. Following the precedent established in Maruti Suzuki Limited, the Court determined that reassessment notices issued in the name of a non-existent entity cannot be sustained, and accordingly set aside the impugned notice and order.
The HC quashed reassessment proceedings initiated against a dissolved partnership firm. The Assessing Officer had erroneously issued notice under s.148A(b) and passed order under s.148A(d) in the name of the partnership firm that had been dissolved effective April 1, 2017. The Court held that such proceedings were untenable, particularly since the petitioner had provided all relevant information including the dissolution deed in response to the show cause notice. Following the precedent established in Maruti Suzuki Limited, the Court determined that reassessment notices issued in the name of a non-existent entity cannot be sustained, and accordingly set aside the impugned notice and order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
