Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Faceless assessment scheme does not absorb the statutory preliminary inquiry procedure for reopening; the scheme's plain language excludes that inquiry process, so a notice to reopen may validly be issued by the jurisdictional assessing officer where the requisite inquiry and order were made by that officer. Reading the faceless scheme to incorporate the preliminary inquiry would alter the scheme and render issuance by a faceless officer meaningless. Conflicting views from other High Courts were noted, but the conclusion here is that automated allocation may trigger notice issuance while reassessment proceedings may proceed facelessly; notices issued by jurisdictional officers after April 2022 are upheld as valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.