Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the notice issued under s.148 was time-barred and jurisdictionally invalid because the six-year surviving period from the end of the relevant assessment year had expired before issuance; the respondent's contention that a ten-year period applied was rejected. The HC found only two days remained to complete the s.148A(d) process and issue a s.148 notice, which in any event expired before the notice dated 27 July 2022. Consequently the impugned s.148 notice and all subsequent communications including notices under s.142(1) and the related show-cause notice were quashed and set aside as beyond jurisdiction. Other contentions of the petitioner were left open.
HC held that the notice issued under s.148 was time-barred and jurisdictionally invalid because the six-year surviving period from the end of the relevant assessment year had expired before issuance; the respondent's contention that a ten-year period applied was rejected. The HC found only two days remained to complete the s.148A(d) process and issue a s.148 notice, which in any event expired before the notice dated 27 July 2022. Consequently the impugned s.148 notice and all subsequent communications including notices under s.142(1) and the related show-cause notice were quashed and set aside as beyond jurisdiction. Other contentions of the petitioner were left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
