Tax appeal allowed: AO exceeded s.144C DRP mandate by introducing new findings and recharacterising non-resident receipts as permanent establishment i...
Anonymized petitioner gets partial relief: bank guarantee quashed, PVC-coated fabric released under reduced conditions while valuation proceedings con...
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 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
