Maintainability of a Section 7 insolvency petition against a financial service provider denied; appeal dismissed for non maintainability and complex d...
Provisional attachment under Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires exhaustion of statutory remedies; impugned order set aside, appeal to tribuna...
Restoration of property under Prevention of Money Laundering Act after attachment dispute rendered academic; possession directed to successful resolut...
Goods Transport Agency services via e commerce portals: consignment note creates custody and liability and enables exemption for unregistered recipien...
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.