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 held that under s.159(1)-(2)(b) the legal representative is liable for tax liabilities of the deceased and proceedings capable of being taken against the deceased may be continued against the legal representative. The court found no merit in challenges to jurisdiction or limitation of notices issued post-death, observing the petitioner failed to notify the Department of the death; assessments properly remained in the name of the deceased with liability to be fastened on legal representatives. The HC rejected jurisdictional/limitation pleas to the extent raised, quashed the impugned orders, and remitted the matter to the 1st respondent for a fresh merits adjudication; the remand bars relitigation of limitation or jurisdiction.
The HC held that under s.159(1)-(2)(b) the legal representative is liable for tax liabilities of the deceased and proceedings capable of being taken against the deceased may be continued against the legal representative. The court found no merit in challenges to jurisdiction or limitation of notices issued post-death, observing the petitioner failed to notify the Department of the death; assessments properly remained in the name of the deceased with liability to be fastened on legal representatives. The HC rejected jurisdictional/limitation pleas to the extent raised, quashed the impugned orders, and remitted the matter to the 1st respondent for a fresh merits adjudication; the remand bars relitigation of limitation or jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
