Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
HC ruled that the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot reopen assessment for AY 2016-17 under Section 153A, as it falls outside the six-year block period following a search action. The notice was invalid because: (1) no asset-related income escape was established, (2) expenses disallowance did not meet statutory criteria for reopening, and (3) the assessment year exceeded the permissible limitation period. The search conducted in FY 2022-23 only allows reassessment for AY 2017-18 through AY 2023-24. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned notice and terminated the reassessment proceedings.
HC ruled that the Assessing Officer (AO) cannot reopen assessment for AY 2016-17 under Section 153A, as it falls outside the six-year block period following a search action. The notice was invalid because: (1) no asset-related income escape was established, (2) expenses disallowance did not meet statutory criteria for reopening, and (3) the assessment year exceeded the permissible limitation period. The search conducted in FY 2022-23 only allows reassessment for AY 2017-18 through AY 2023-24. Consequently, the HC set aside the impugned notice and terminated the reassessment proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
