Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
The dominant issue was whether the Assessing Officer could pass an order giving effect to DRP directions after expiry of the one-month period mandated by section 144C(13). The court held that section 144C(13) imposes a strict, mandatory timeline, and statutory requirements must be complied with in the prescribed manner; treating the time limit as directory would negate the provision's mandatory character. Since the one-month period had already lapsed, the pending proceedings to give effect to the DRP directions, including the transfer pricing addition, were barred by limitation and could not be continued under section 144C(13). - HC
The dominant issue was whether the Assessing Officer could pass an order giving effect to DRP directions after expiry of the one-month period mandated by section 144C(13). The court held that section 144C(13) imposes a strict, mandatory timeline, and statutory requirements must be complied with in the prescribed manner; treating the time limit as directory would negate the provision's mandatory character. Since the one-month period had already lapsed, the pending proceedings to give effect to the DRP directions, including the transfer pricing addition, were barred by limitation and could not be continued under section 144C(13). - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
