Departmental appeal limitation after call-book recall preserves original filing, while documented correlation supports SAD refund on imported granules...
Income-tax prosecution fails when appellate remand removes its factual foundation; directors require company arraignment for vicarious criminal liabil...
Capital character of assignment consideration prevents taxation as residuary income, while unsupported interest-related expenditure remains non-deduct...
Make-available condition shields regional support-service receipts from Indian taxation where no independent capability or permanent establishment exi...
HC examined reassessment proceedings initiated under ss. 148 and 148A (new regime) in light of the SC ruling in Rajeev Bansal and the effect of TOLA and Ashish Agarwal. Applying the "surviving period" doctrine, HC held that, after excluding the periods mandated by SC for deemed stay and for assessee's reply, only one day remained for completion of s.148A(d) proceedings and issuance of a valid s.148 notice, which expired on 9.06.2022. The impugned notice dated 25.07.2022 was therefore held to be time-barred. HC rejected Revenue's contention that non-filing of reply extinguished limitation, and quashed the reassessment notice and consequent proceedings.
HC examined reassessment proceedings initiated under ss. 148 and 148A (new regime) in light of the SC ruling in Rajeev Bansal and the effect of TOLA and Ashish Agarwal. Applying the "surviving period" doctrine, HC held that, after excluding the periods mandated by SC for deemed stay and for assessee's reply, only one day remained for completion of s.148A(d) proceedings and issuance of a valid s.148 notice, which expired on 9.06.2022. The impugned notice dated 25.07.2022 was therefore held to be time-barred. HC rejected Revenue's contention that non-filing of reply extinguished limitation, and quashed the reassessment notice and consequent proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Join Channel 
