Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6741 to 6760 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.