Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC entertained the writ petition challenging rejection of a rectification application and the consequential assessment order, noting that the petitioner had failed to respond to the pre-assessment notice. Applying its consistent view in analogous matters, HC quashed the impugned assessment and rectification rejection orders and remitted the matter to the Assessing Authority for de novo consideration. The remand was made conditional upon the petitioner-assessee depositing a quantified portion of the disputed tax, between 25% and 100%, as determined with reference to the delay in approaching HC. The Assessing Authority was directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to pass a fresh, reasoned order in accordance with law. With these directions and conditions, the writ petition was disposed of.
HC entertained the writ petition challenging rejection of a rectification application and the consequential assessment order, noting that the petitioner had failed to respond to the pre-assessment notice. Applying its consistent view in analogous matters, HC quashed the impugned assessment and rectification rejection orders and remitted the matter to the Assessing Authority for de novo consideration. The remand was made conditional upon the petitioner-assessee depositing a quantified portion of the disputed tax, between 25% and 100%, as determined with reference to the delay in approaching HC. The Assessing Authority was directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to pass a fresh, reasoned order in accordance with law. With these directions and conditions, the writ petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
