Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that reopening of assessment u/s 147 beyond 3 years is impermissible when tax evasion does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000. Relying on precedents from Delhi HC and Bombay HC, the tribunal quashed the reassessment notice u/s 148A(d) and 148, finding the proceedings invalid. The AO's best judgment assessment, which added unexplained investment and stamp duty value differences, was set aside. The assessee's appeal was allowed, rendering subsequent grounds academic, effectively nullifying the extended assessment proceedings.
ITAT held that reopening of assessment u/s 147 beyond 3 years is impermissible when tax evasion does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000. Relying on precedents from Delhi HC and Bombay HC, the tribunal quashed the reassessment notice u/s 148A(d) and 148, finding the proceedings invalid. The AO's best judgment assessment, which added unexplained investment and stamp duty value differences, was set aside. The assessee's appeal was allowed, rendering subsequent grounds academic, effectively nullifying the extended assessment proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
