Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Penalty for estimation of income and disallowances for tax non-deduction clarified: estimation-based penalties not sustainable; additions without conc...
Reopening an assessment requires contemporaneous reasons to believe supported by tangible material and a live link to escapement of income; a mere recalculation of full value of consideration using lowest prevailing market value or a change of opinion is insufficient. The taxpayer had already provided stock valuation details and basis in response to queries under section 142(1), and the subsequent communications did not disclose fresh tangible material or a live link justifying reassessment under section 147. The impugned reopening notices were therefore held to lack jurisdiction and were quashed in favour of the assessee.
Reopening an assessment requires contemporaneous reasons to believe supported by tangible material and a live link to escapement of income; a mere recalculation of full value of consideration using lowest prevailing market value or a change of opinion is insufficient. The taxpayer had already provided stock valuation details and basis in response to queries under section 142(1), and the subsequent communications did not disclose fresh tangible material or a live link justifying reassessment under section 147. The impugned reopening notices were therefore held to lack jurisdiction and were quashed in favour of the assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.