Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
An application under Section 119(2)(b) challenged refusal to permit filing a revised return beyond five years; the High Court found the taxpayer had pursued rectification within the five year window and had reasonably relied on rectification as the remedy. The court held the authority could not ignore the circular's temporal condition, treated the misdeclaration as a bona fide error without deciding revised return merits, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration of the revised return for the relevant assessment year in accordance with law.
An application under Section 119(2)(b) challenged refusal to permit filing a revised return beyond five years; the High Court found the taxpayer had pursued rectification within the five year window and had reasonably relied on rectification as the remedy. The court held the authority could not ignore the circular's temporal condition, treated the misdeclaration as a bona fide error without deciding revised return merits, set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh consideration of the revised return for the relevant assessment year in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
