Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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 notices issued under section 148 and section 148A(b) by the jurisdictional assessing officer, instead of the faceless assessing officer, are invalid and set aside; consequent reassessment orders premised on such notices are quashed. The Tribunal further determined that where the assessing officer, in reassessment proceedings, made no addition on the very issue forming the basis for reopening, the officer lacked jurisdiction to make other additions, rendering the reassessment void. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival of the appeal should controlling decisions of higher courts on the faceless-notice issue necessitate modification of this order.
ITAT held that notices issued under section 148 and section 148A(b) by the jurisdictional assessing officer, instead of the faceless assessing officer, are invalid and set aside; consequent reassessment orders premised on such notices are quashed. The Tribunal further determined that where the assessing officer, in reassessment proceedings, made no addition on the very issue forming the basis for reopening, the officer lacked jurisdiction to make other additions, rendering the reassessment void. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival of the appeal should controlling decisions of higher courts on the faceless-notice issue necessitate modification of this order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.