Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
HC held that the petition is maintainable and that issuance of a fresh demand on identical grounds previously examined under Section 61 is impermissible. The court construed Section 61(2) as creating an embargo on further demands, including those under Section 73, where the taxpayer's explanation was accepted; Section 73 contains no non-obstante provision to override Section 61(2). Consequently, the show-cause notice issued under Section 73 and the consequential adjudication were vitiated. The impugned SCN dated 29 May 2024 and the resultant order dated 28 Aug 2024 are quashed, and the petition is disposed of with the petitioner granted relief.
HC held that the petition is maintainable and that issuance of a fresh demand on identical grounds previously examined under Section 61 is impermissible. The court construed Section 61(2) as creating an embargo on further demands, including those under Section 73, where the taxpayer's explanation was accepted; Section 73 contains no non-obstante provision to override Section 61(2). Consequently, the show-cause notice issued under Section 73 and the consequential adjudication were vitiated. The impugned SCN dated 29 May 2024 and the resultant order dated 28 Aug 2024 are quashed, and the petition is disposed of with the petitioner granted relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
