Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Validity of reopening under section 147/148 is contested on the ground that the sanction required from the competent authority was not obtained; the notice issued in AY 2015-16 on 28 March 2021 falls within the temporal ratio of the cited Supreme Court authority, but was quashed because the sanction stated on the notice was from the CIT (Exemption) rather than the Joint Commissioner mandated by law, and Revenue cannot contradict the express language of the notice regarding whose satisfaction was obtained. The necessity for sanction by the specific authority is determinative, leading to invalidation of the notice.
Validity of reopening under section 147/148 is contested on the ground that the sanction required from the competent authority was not obtained; the notice issued in AY 2015-16 on 28 March 2021 falls within the temporal ratio of the cited Supreme Court authority, but was quashed because the sanction stated on the notice was from the CIT (Exemption) rather than the Joint Commissioner mandated by law, and Revenue cannot contradict the express language of the notice regarding whose satisfaction was obtained. The necessity for sanction by the specific authority is determinative, leading to invalidation of the notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
