Road restoration charges constitute taxable services when requested for commercial pipeline activity, requiring reverse-charge GST from the business r...
Interest on delayed release of requisitioned cash includes statutory pre-assessment interest and restitutionary compensation for unlawful post-assessm...
Incomplete inventory records justify rejecting accounts, while profit estimation requires relevant comparable material and interest falls under other ...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires functional alignment; delayed associated-enterprise receivables need separate LIBOR-based benchmarking, while ...
Extended reassessment limitation in search cases requires asset-linked escaped income, invalidating additions based only on unexplained money or expen...
Enhanced tolerance band under section 43CA applies retrospectively, deleting qualifying deemed-sale additions while disputed stamp valuation requires ...
The HC upheld the reopening of the assessment under Sections 147/148 of the IT Act, rejecting the assessee's contention that once returns are filed and accepted, they cannot be reopened. The Court emphasized that the assessing officer must have a recorded reason to believe, supported by tangible material with a live link, that income has escaped assessment. The facts showed that the assessee raised substantial share capital from paper companies, which was not reflected in the original returns, justifying the reopening. The procedural requirements, including sanction from higher authorities and furnishing reasons to the assessee, were complied with. The Court held that the power to reassess is intended to prevent wilful misstatements and ensure true disclosure. The petitioner's objections were dismissed, confirming the legality of the reassessment proceedings and affirming the absence of any bar to reopening under the amended provisions effective from 01.04.1989.
The HC upheld the reopening of the assessment under Sections 147/148 of the IT Act, rejecting the assessee's contention that once returns are filed and accepted, they cannot be reopened. The Court emphasized that the assessing officer must have a recorded reason to believe, supported by tangible material with a live link, that income has escaped assessment. The facts showed that the assessee raised substantial share capital from paper companies, which was not reflected in the original returns, justifying the reopening. The procedural requirements, including sanction from higher authorities and furnishing reasons to the assessee, were complied with. The Court held that the power to reassess is intended to prevent wilful misstatements and ensure true disclosure. The petitioner's objections were dismissed, confirming the legality of the reassessment proceedings and affirming the absence of any bar to reopening under the amended provisions effective from 01.04.1989.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4920 
