Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging the impugned assessment order issued following notice in DRC 01, noting that the petitioner had already undergone an assessment for the same period by the State Tax Officer. The court held that the statutory scheme precludes duplication of assessment proceedings for the identical period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. However, the respondents were granted liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings to recover any differential amount within the framework of the earlier assessment, provided the statutory provisions permit such action.
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging the impugned assessment order issued following notice in DRC 01, noting that the petitioner had already undergone an assessment for the same period by the State Tax Officer. The court held that the statutory scheme precludes duplication of assessment proceedings for the identical period. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. However, the respondents were granted liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings to recover any differential amount within the framework of the earlier assessment, provided the statutory provisions permit such action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.