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...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Reopening an income-tax assessment for the identical bank-deposit transaction already investigated and finally adjudicated is impermissible where the subsequent authority relies on the same material; the doctrine Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa bars subjecting the assessee to duplicate adjudication. The court reiterates that a notice under section 148 requires "reasons to believe" grounded in tangible material with a nexus to escaped income and cannot be based on mere suspicion or a change of opinion. The reassessment attempt was self conflicting and set aside; the writ petition was allowed, preventing a second assessment on the same subject matter.
Reopening an income-tax assessment for the identical bank-deposit transaction already investigated and finally adjudicated is impermissible where the subsequent authority relies on the same material; the doctrine Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa bars subjecting the assessee to duplicate adjudication. The court reiterates that a notice under section 148 requires "reasons to believe" grounded in tangible material with a nexus to escaped income and cannot be based on mere suspicion or a change of opinion. The reassessment attempt was self conflicting and set aside; the writ petition was allowed, preventing a second assessment on the same subject matter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
