NPCI-based bank account validation for IEC applications and modifications enables real-time validation; incorrect details block submission or trigger ...
Creation/Invocation of pledge of securities through depository system: standardized pledge forms, notice requirement and invocation notifications to p...
Calendar Spread margin benefit for Single Stock Derivatives suspended on expiry day for expiring contracts; exchanges must implement systems and rule ...
Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Reopening under s.148A(1) was challenged on the ground that the AO lacked "information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" and instead undertook a roving inquiry based solely on consolidated debit and credit bank entries. The Court held that s.148A(1) permits only verification of such information available on the portal and does not authorize fishing inquiries, particularly when transactions were through banking channels and party-wise details were already available. As the notice and order were founded merely on consolidated bank entries without any further incriminating material, the AO exceeded jurisdiction; the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Reopening under s.148A(1) was challenged on the ground that the AO lacked "information which suggests that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment" and instead undertook a roving inquiry based solely on consolidated debit and credit bank entries. The Court held that s.148A(1) permits only verification of such information available on the portal and does not authorize fishing inquiries, particularly when transactions were through banking channels and party-wise details were already available. As the notice and order were founded merely on consolidated bank entries without any further incriminating material, the AO exceeded jurisdiction; the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.