Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
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.