Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 95999 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC set aside the reassessment proceedings and quashed the sanction under section 151 insofar as they pertain to the Petitioner, holding that no income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The court found the asserted "reasons to believe" unsupported by cogent material: the investigation report did not list the Petitioner as a beneficiary of accommodation entries and the contested transactions were sales proceeds already offered to tax. The reasons recorded misidentified another assessee and, together with uncorrected supervisory review, demonstrated a mechanical, non-application of mind in granting sanction. Consequently, reopening was held invalid and the Petitioner succeeded.
HC set aside the reassessment proceedings and quashed the sanction under section 151 insofar as they pertain to the Petitioner, holding that no income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The court found the asserted "reasons to believe" unsupported by cogent material: the investigation report did not list the Petitioner as a beneficiary of accommodation entries and the contested transactions were sales proceeds already offered to tax. The reasons recorded misidentified another assessee and, together with uncorrected supervisory review, demonstrated a mechanical, non-application of mind in granting sanction. Consequently, reopening was held invalid and the Petitioner succeeded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
