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...
HC allowed the writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings under Section 147. The court found that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked valid grounds for reopening the assessment, as the taxpayer had made full and true disclosure during the original proceedings. The AO failed to demonstrate independent application of mind or identify any fresh information justifying reassessment. The court observed that the AO was cognizant of all relevant facts during the initial assessment and merely relied on a subsequent year's communication without substantive evidence of concealment or incorrect information. Consequently, the reassessment order was quashed as procedurally invalid and without reasonable basis.
HC allowed the writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings under Section 147. The court found that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked valid grounds for reopening the assessment, as the taxpayer had made full and true disclosure during the original proceedings. The AO failed to demonstrate independent application of mind or identify any fresh information justifying reassessment. The court observed that the AO was cognizant of all relevant facts during the initial assessment and merely relied on a subsequent year's communication without substantive evidence of concealment or incorrect information. Consequently, the reassessment order was quashed as procedurally invalid and without reasonable basis.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
