ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
HC quashed the reopening and consequential proceedings in favour of the assessee. The court found the notice issued under s.148A(b) for AY 2014-15 impermissibly relied on the return and assessment materials of a different year (AY 2013-14), so the Revenue lacked foundational information to form reasons to believe for reopening under s.147. Further, the jurisdictional officer initiated proceedings beyond the limitation prescribed by amended s.149 (effective 01.04.2021), and the show-cause notice dated 23.05.2022 did not disclose information pertinent to AY 2014-15. For these reasons the HC held the impugned notice and proceedings void and quashed them.
HC quashed the reopening and consequential proceedings in favour of the assessee. The court found the notice issued under s.148A(b) for AY 2014-15 impermissibly relied on the return and assessment materials of a different year (AY 2013-14), so the Revenue lacked foundational information to form reasons to believe for reopening under s.147. Further, the jurisdictional officer initiated proceedings beyond the limitation prescribed by amended s.149 (effective 01.04.2021), and the show-cause notice dated 23.05.2022 did not disclose information pertinent to AY 2014-15. For these reasons the HC held the impugned notice and proceedings void and quashed them.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
