Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
The HC held that the issuance of the notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was beyond the prescribed period of limitation under section 149(1)(a), as the AO issued the notice on the last permissible date but failed to extend the order-passing period under section 148A(d) to the mandatory seven days. The AO's initial decision against reopening the assessment was revised solely based on the specified authority's approval, which did not cure the limitation defect. Since the case did not fall under the extended limitation clause, the notice was invalid. Consequently, the reopening of assessment was barred, and the impugned notice was quashed, affirming that adherence to the limitation period and procedural safeguards under sections 148, 148A, and 149 is mandatory for reopening assessments.
The HC held that the issuance of the notice under section 148A(b) of the Act was beyond the prescribed period of limitation under section 149(1)(a), as the AO issued the notice on the last permissible date but failed to extend the order-passing period under section 148A(d) to the mandatory seven days. The AO's initial decision against reopening the assessment was revised solely based on the specified authority's approval, which did not cure the limitation defect. Since the case did not fall under the extended limitation clause, the notice was invalid. Consequently, the reopening of assessment was barred, and the impugned notice was quashed, affirming that adherence to the limitation period and procedural safeguards under sections 148, 148A, and 149 is mandatory for reopening assessments.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.