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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the AO's reassessment notice under Section 147 was invalid. The AO mechanically recorded reasons based on third-party information without providing substantive evidence directly linking the petitioner to any undisclosed income. The court found no material connection between the survey operation and the petitioner's transactions. The AO's refusal to disclose confidential information to the assessee violated procedural fairness, rendering the reopening of assessment arbitrary and illegal. Consequently, the court quashed the reassessment notice, deciding in favor of the assessee and emphasizing the need for concrete, specific reasons when initiating reassessment proceedings.
HC held that the AO's reassessment notice under Section 147 was invalid. The AO mechanically recorded reasons based on third-party information without providing substantive evidence directly linking the petitioner to any undisclosed income. The court found no material connection between the survey operation and the petitioner's transactions. The AO's refusal to disclose confidential information to the assessee violated procedural fairness, rendering the reopening of assessment arbitrary and illegal. Consequently, the court quashed the reassessment notice, deciding in favor of the assessee and emphasizing the need for concrete, specific reasons when initiating reassessment proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.