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...
The HC allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned order passed under s.148A(d) and the notice issued under s.148 for AY 2017-18. The court accepted respondents' affidavits acknowledging that the PAN database was not linked to the Non-Filer case-selection procedure and that business/investment entries reported by third parties are flagged to jurisdictional officers without regard to PAN status. The order found the notice was grounded on a PAN deactivated since 2009, and held the Assessing Officer failed to apply independent mind or verify the petitioner's disclosures that transactions were reflected under an active PAN. The petition was allowed on these grounds.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed and set aside the impugned order passed under s.148A(d) and the notice issued under s.148 for AY 2017-18. The court accepted respondents' affidavits acknowledging that the PAN database was not linked to the Non-Filer case-selection procedure and that business/investment entries reported by third parties are flagged to jurisdictional officers without regard to PAN status. The order found the notice was grounded on a PAN deactivated since 2009, and held the Assessing Officer failed to apply independent mind or verify the petitioner's disclosures that transactions were reflected under an active PAN. The petition was allowed on these grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.