Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
HC held that the Office note dated 29.8.2002 did not constitute a valid recording of "satisfaction" as required by s.158BD (read with s.158BC), because it merely reflected investigatory efforts and speculative material rather than an AO's reasoned satisfaction based on proximate, relevant evidence. Consequently, notices issued under s.158BD pursuant to a letter dated 5.8.2003 were held time-barred as not contemporaneous with the block assessment completed on 28.8.2002. The HC set aside the initiation of proceedings under s.158BD and allowed the assessee's cross-objection, concluding the departmental action was invalid for want of statutory satisfaction and for being barred by limitation.
HC held that the Office note dated 29.8.2002 did not constitute a valid recording of "satisfaction" as required by s.158BD (read with s.158BC), because it merely reflected investigatory efforts and speculative material rather than an AO's reasoned satisfaction based on proximate, relevant evidence. Consequently, notices issued under s.158BD pursuant to a letter dated 5.8.2003 were held time-barred as not contemporaneous with the block assessment completed on 28.8.2002. The HC set aside the initiation of proceedings under s.158BD and allowed the assessee's cross-objection, concluding the departmental action was invalid for want of statutory satisfaction and for being barred by limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.