Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
ITAT held that the assessments framed u/s 153C read with 153D are invalid for lack of jurisdiction: the deemed date of search was 17.10.2022 so s.153C could not be invoked, the requisite satisfaction note was neither supplied nor properly recorded (a consolidated note for multiple years vitiated proceedings), and sanction u/s 153D was mechanical and without application of mind. Consequential additions were set aside: alleged capital gains based solely on seizure spreadsheets without corroboration were not sustained, the s.54B relief already allowed in earlier s.143(3) proceedings was not revisit-able under s.153C, and reopening under s.148 amounted to change of opinion and was therefore invalid. Appeals allowed in favour of the assessee.
ITAT held that the assessments framed u/s 153C read with 153D are invalid for lack of jurisdiction: the deemed date of search was 17.10.2022 so s.153C could not be invoked, the requisite satisfaction note was neither supplied nor properly recorded (a consolidated note for multiple years vitiated proceedings), and sanction u/s 153D was mechanical and without application of mind. Consequential additions were set aside: alleged capital gains based solely on seizure spreadsheets without corroboration were not sustained, the s.54B relief already allowed in earlier s.143(3) proceedings was not revisit-able under s.153C, and reopening under s.148 amounted to change of opinion and was therefore invalid. Appeals allowed in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.