Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Revisional powers under Section 264 were held to be broad and aimed at preventing miscarriage of justice and granting relief to an assessee even where the assessee committed mistakes in the original return; consequently the revision application should have been considered and the impugned order under Section 264 was set aside. The court distinguished the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd., finding it inapplicable because that case did not address revisional powers under Section 264 but concerned a post filing deduction without a revised return.
Revisional powers under Section 264 were held to be broad and aimed at preventing miscarriage of justice and granting relief to an assessee even where the assessee committed mistakes in the original return; consequently the revision application should have been considered and the impugned order under Section 264 was set aside. The court distinguished the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd., finding it inapplicable because that case did not address revisional powers under Section 264 but concerned a post filing deduction without a revised return.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
