Disciplinary proportionality requires penalties for Authorised Representative misconduct to match proven harm, leading to reconsideration of registrat...
Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Page of 4920
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 98394 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the final assessment order dated 31.08.2016 is barred by limitation. The court ruled that where an objection is filed, the AO must determine both receipt date of the draft assessment order and whether the objection was filed within the 30-day period prescribed by s.144C(2); only an objection filed within that period restrains the AO from completing assessment. The AO could not lawfully rely on the assessee's asserted service date without verifying actual delivery (e.g., postal tracking) and, having failed to exercise due diligence, wrongly computed the 30-day period from 14.03.2016. Because the objection was belated, the Tribunal rightly found the assessment time-barred.
HC held that the final assessment order dated 31.08.2016 is barred by limitation. The court ruled that where an objection is filed, the AO must determine both receipt date of the draft assessment order and whether the objection was filed within the 30-day period prescribed by s.144C(2); only an objection filed within that period restrains the AO from completing assessment. The AO could not lawfully rely on the assessee's asserted service date without verifying actual delivery (e.g., postal tracking) and, having failed to exercise due diligence, wrongly computed the 30-day period from 14.03.2016. Because the objection was belated, the Tribunal rightly found the assessment time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4920 
