Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
Cross country pipeline classification and ITC entitlement: pipelines outside factory treated as immovable, ITC disallowed under Section 17 restriction...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6181 to 6200 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Assessment jurisdiction under the search-assessment proviso was...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based additions.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Assessment jurisdiction under the search-assessment proviso was held invalid where seized material did not demonstrably show escaped income represented as an asset, so the proviso could not be invoked for a completed earlier year. References to a Valuation Officer to estimate builder construction expenditure were outside the statutory scope as those costs were revenue/stock-in-trade and no prima facie material under parallel unexplained income provisions existed. Valuation reports issued or served after the mandatory six-month period were treated as time-barred and inadmissible. Retracted confessional statements not confronted and without cross-examination were excluded; unsecured loan proof discharged the initial onus and the additions were deleted.
Assessment jurisdiction under the search-assessment proviso was held invalid where seized material did not demonstrably show escaped income represented as an asset, so the proviso could not be invoked for a completed earlier year. References to a Valuation Officer to estimate builder construction expenditure were outside the statutory scope as those costs were revenue/stock-in-trade and no prima facie material under parallel unexplained income provisions existed. Valuation reports issued or served after the mandatory six-month period were treated as time-barred and inadmissible. Retracted confessional statements not confronted and without cross-examination were excluded; unsecured loan proof discharged the initial onus and the additions were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.