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 petitioner cannot re-challenge notices issued under ss. 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148, which ought to have been agitated before the DRP; having been directed earlier to raise those issues before the DRP, the petitioner did so but failed to inform the Assessing Officer, whereupon the AO, acting under s.144C, validly passed the final assessment order. In the interests of justice, however, the HC set aside the final assessment order, the demand notice under s.156 read with the issue letter, and the DRP order rejecting objections, and directed revival of the petitioner's objections before the DRP for adjudication on merits. The HC found no fault with the AO's procedural conduct.
HC held that the petitioner cannot re-challenge notices issued under ss. 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148, which ought to have been agitated before the DRP; having been directed earlier to raise those issues before the DRP, the petitioner did so but failed to inform the Assessing Officer, whereupon the AO, acting under s.144C, validly passed the final assessment order. In the interests of justice, however, the HC set aside the final assessment order, the demand notice under s.156 read with the issue letter, and the DRP order rejecting objections, and directed revival of the petitioner's objections before the DRP for adjudication on merits. The HC found no fault with the AO's procedural conduct.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
