Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
HC allowed the petition, invalidating the reassessment notice. The court determined that the Assessing Officer lacked sufficient material to demonstrate income escaping assessment exceeding Rs. 50 lacs in AY 2013-14. The notice was found to be beyond the prescribed limitation period under Section 149(1)(a) and did not satisfy conditions under Section 149(1)(b). The court specifically noted no evidence of undisclosed transactions or income, rendering the reassessment notice procedurally and substantively unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned order and notice were set aside, providing relief to the assessee.
HC allowed the petition, invalidating the reassessment notice. The court determined that the Assessing Officer lacked sufficient material to demonstrate income escaping assessment exceeding Rs. 50 lacs in AY 2013-14. The notice was found to be beyond the prescribed limitation period under Section 149(1)(a) and did not satisfy conditions under Section 149(1)(b). The court specifically noted no evidence of undisclosed transactions or income, rendering the reassessment notice procedurally and substantively unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned order and notice were set aside, providing relief to the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
