Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Reassessment proceedings were held invalid because, prior to issuance of the order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2022 by the jurisdictional AO, the Central Government had notified the faceless scheme under section 151A mandating that actions under sections 148A(b), 148A(d) and issuance of notice under section 148 be undertaken only through the faceless mechanism. Since the notice was issued contrary to this statutory mandate, the non-compliance was treated as violative of the rule of law, rendering the notice unsustainable; consequently, the reassessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144 was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Reassessment proceedings were held invalid because, prior to issuance of the order under section 148A(d) and notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2022 by the jurisdictional AO, the Central Government had notified the faceless scheme under section 151A mandating that actions under sections 148A(b), 148A(d) and issuance of notice under section 148 be undertaken only through the faceless mechanism. Since the notice was issued contrary to this statutory mandate, the non-compliance was treated as violative of the rule of law, rendering the notice unsustainable; consequently, the reassessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144 was quashed and the appeal was allowed. - ITAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
