Personal hearing requirements in GST adjudication were satisfied by prior opportunities and written submissions; appellate limitation received writ-pe...
Interactive flat panels meeting automatic data processing conditions are distinguished from monitors, while later classification clarifications apply ...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
761 to 780 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The ITAT allowed the appeal of Assessee X, holding the reassessment proceedings under s.147 invalid due to improper sanction under the new s.151 regime. The notice u/s 148 and order u/s 148A(d), issued beyond three years from the relevant assessment year, required prior approval from higher specified authorities (PCCI/PDGIT/CCIT/DGIT), but were instead sanctioned by the PCIT, contrary to the amended statutory hierarchy. Relying on binding precedents of the SC and the jurisdictional HC, and holding that TOLA only extended limitation and did not alter the approval structure under s.151, the ITAT quashed the notice u/s 148 and consequently annulled the reassessment order. The assessee's appeal was allowed in full.
The ITAT allowed the appeal of Assessee X, holding the reassessment proceedings under s.147 invalid due to improper sanction under the new s.151 regime. The notice u/s 148 and order u/s 148A(d), issued beyond three years from the relevant assessment year, required prior approval from higher specified authorities (PCCI/PDGIT/CCIT/DGIT), but were instead sanctioned by the PCIT, contrary to the amended statutory hierarchy. Relying on binding precedents of the SC and the jurisdictional HC, and holding that TOLA only extended limitation and did not alter the approval structure under s.151, the ITAT quashed the notice u/s 148 and consequently annulled the reassessment order. The assessee's appeal was allowed in full.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.