Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Sanction for prosecution of a public servant must be granted by the authority competent to remove the officer; a sanction accorded by a subordinate authority is a jurisdictional defect, rendering the sanction void ab initio and necessitating discharge, which was accordingly upheld and proceedings terminated. The statutory requirement in Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act is anchored in the constitutional safeguard of Article 311(1), and departmental circulars cannot cure the defect; the curative principle is inapplicable where a superior legal impediment exists (withdrawal of general consent), so no fresh sanction could sustain the prosecution.
Sanction for prosecution of a public servant must be granted by the authority competent to remove the officer; a sanction accorded by a subordinate authority is a jurisdictional defect, rendering the sanction void ab initio and necessitating discharge, which was accordingly upheld and proceedings terminated. The statutory requirement in Section 19(1)(c) of the PC Act is anchored in the constitutional safeguard of Article 311(1), and departmental circulars cannot cure the defect; the curative principle is inapplicable where a superior legal impediment exists (withdrawal of general consent), so no fresh sanction could sustain the prosecution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
