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 held that assessment orders for tax years 2014-2015 and 2016-2017 were time-barred under Rule 14A (5A), which mandates assessments must be completed within four years from the date of return filing. The court invalidated assessment orders dated 12.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 as they exceeded the statutory limitation period. For 2015-2016, only assessments related to March were deemed valid, with the court emphasizing that the limitation period is mandatory and binding. The judgment reinforces strict adherence to prescribed time limits in tax assessment proceedings, effectively setting aside assessments conducted beyond the prescribed four-year window.
HC held that assessment orders for tax years 2014-2015 and 2016-2017 were time-barred under Rule 14A (5A), which mandates assessments must be completed within four years from the date of return filing. The court invalidated assessment orders dated 12.07.2021 and 30.07.2021 as they exceeded the statutory limitation period. For 2015-2016, only assessments related to March were deemed valid, with the court emphasizing that the limitation period is mandatory and binding. The judgment reinforces strict adherence to prescribed time limits in tax assessment proceedings, effectively setting aside assessments conducted beyond the prescribed four-year window.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.