Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
The Tribunal held that a prior appellate determination that a show cause notice did not satisfy the statutory notice requirement attained finality where not appealed, and subordinate authorities must follow that ruling; consequence: de novo proceedings premised on the discarded proposition are tainted and impermissible. The remand was confined to identifying the triggering event and computing the limitation period for issuing the statutory notice; consequence: only those factual and temporal issues may now be re-examined. Executive review channels and administrative supervisory provisions were recognised as the proper remedies rather than reviving settled legal propositions; consequence: reopening settled law is proscribed.
The Tribunal held that a prior appellate determination that a show cause notice did not satisfy the statutory notice requirement attained finality where not appealed, and subordinate authorities must follow that ruling; consequence: de novo proceedings premised on the discarded proposition are tainted and impermissible. The remand was confined to identifying the triggering event and computing the limitation period for issuing the statutory notice; consequence: only those factual and temporal issues may now be re-examined. Executive review channels and administrative supervisory provisions were recognised as the proper remedies rather than reviving settled legal propositions; consequence: reopening settled law is proscribed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.