Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
An assessee-trust denied exemption under s.11 sought revision under s.264 against an order appealable under s.246A. The revisional authority could not refuse to exercise jurisdiction merely because an appellate remedy existed, since the statute does not mandate exhaustion of appeal where no appeal is filed; accordingly, rejection on that ground was unsustainable. Further, s.264 powers are wide and intended to prevent miscarriage of justice, enabling relief even where the assessee's own mistake in the return caused omission of a legitimate claim; Goetze (India) Ltd. was held inapplicable. The impugned order rejecting the s.264 application for AY 2016-17 was quashed and set aside. - HC
An assessee-trust denied exemption under s.11 sought revision under s.264 against an order appealable under s.246A. The revisional authority could not refuse to exercise jurisdiction merely because an appellate remedy existed, since the statute does not mandate exhaustion of appeal where no appeal is filed; accordingly, rejection on that ground was unsustainable. Further, s.264 powers are wide and intended to prevent miscarriage of justice, enabling relief even where the assessee's own mistake in the return caused omission of a legitimate claim; Goetze (India) Ltd. was held inapplicable. The impugned order rejecting the s.264 application for AY 2016-17 was quashed and set aside. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.