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...
Challenge concerns intimation under Rule 142(1A) and Rule 142(2A) regarding liability for sale of mineral rough stone and gravel. The HC found the writ petition not maintainable because the petitioner filed a representation and participated in the proceedings; consequence: petition dismissed. Separately, the court required that any coercive action be preceded by consideration of the petitioners representation, an opportunity of hearing, and issuance of a reasoned order; consequence: respondent directed to consider the reply dated 12.12.2025 on merits, afford hearing, and pass a reasoned order before taking coercive steps.
Challenge concerns intimation under Rule 142(1A) and Rule 142(2A) regarding liability for sale of mineral rough stone and gravel. The HC found the writ petition not maintainable because the petitioner filed a representation and participated in the proceedings; consequence: petition dismissed. Separately, the court required that any coercive action be preceded by consideration of the petitioners representation, an opportunity of hearing, and issuance of a reasoned order; consequence: respondent directed to consider the reply dated 12.12.2025 on merits, afford hearing, and pass a reasoned order before taking coercive steps.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
