Dependent Agent PE unresolved for lack of factual inquiry; arm's-length distribution accepted; royalty claim rejected; 15% refund interest (Section 24...
Exemption under s.10(23C)(iiiad) upheld; appeal allowed, interest and dividends excluded from annual receipts, disallowance deleted, capital gains exe...
The HC held that both the JAO and the FAO possess concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under s.148, consistent with statutory mandate in s.151A; co-ordinate bench precedent in the same territorial jurisdiction remains binding notwithstanding an appeal pending before the apex court, subject to the limited carve-out permitting Revenue to continue proceedings with protective directions in prior litigations. The Supreme Court authority relied upon by petitioners does not assist on these specific facts. In consequence, the appeals by the petitioners are devoid of merit and are dismissed, leaving the reassessment proceedings initiated by either JAO or FAO operative within the territorial jurisdiction.
The HC held that both the JAO and the FAO possess concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment proceedings under s.148, consistent with statutory mandate in s.151A; co-ordinate bench precedent in the same territorial jurisdiction remains binding notwithstanding an appeal pending before the apex court, subject to the limited carve-out permitting Revenue to continue proceedings with protective directions in prior litigations. The Supreme Court authority relied upon by petitioners does not assist on these specific facts. In consequence, the appeals by the petitioners are devoid of merit and are dismissed, leaving the reassessment proceedings initiated by either JAO or FAO operative within the territorial jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
