Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to a reopening notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner sold immovable property for Rs. 40 lakh to a third party through consent terms with a lender to satisfy debt, but failed to file any return of income disclosing this transaction. The petitioner argued denial of hearing opportunity under section 144B(6)(vii), violating natural justice principles. The HC held that since no return was filed, no hearing opportunity was required. The court found clear income escapement causing revenue loss and directed compliance with the impugned notice, rejecting the petition entirely.
The HC dismissed the petitioner's challenge to a reopening notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner sold immovable property for Rs. 40 lakh to a third party through consent terms with a lender to satisfy debt, but failed to file any return of income disclosing this transaction. The petitioner argued denial of hearing opportunity under section 144B(6)(vii), violating natural justice principles. The HC held that since no return was filed, no hearing opportunity was required. The court found clear income escapement causing revenue loss and directed compliance with the impugned notice, rejecting the petition entirely.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
