Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reopening of assessment on allegation of bogus invoices was held unjustified because ledger entries did not show escaped income and the AO treated Rs.3,67,43,973 as bogus purchase despite it being claimed as a deduction and linked to a later payment of Rs.5,13,02,342 following a DGGI survey. The petitioner was not called upon to explain the alleged bogus GST claim, and the High Court found procedural and substantive defects in the reassessment action. Consequently the notice under reopening and the impugned order were quashed and the writ petition allowed.
Reopening of assessment on allegation of bogus invoices was held unjustified because ledger entries did not show escaped income and the AO treated Rs.3,67,43,973 as bogus purchase despite it being claimed as a deduction and linked to a later payment of Rs.5,13,02,342 following a DGGI survey. The petitioner was not called upon to explain the alleged bogus GST claim, and the High Court found procedural and substantive defects in the reassessment action. Consequently the notice under reopening and the impugned order were quashed and the writ petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
