Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Arguable jurisdictional defects were identified in reassessment proceedings: the notice under Section 148 was challenged on the ground that only a Faceless Assessing Officer may issue such notices post 29 March 2022, rendering notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer prima facie void; this ground was held sufficient to invoke writ jurisdiction. Separately, the notice gave only thirty days to file a return, whereas a statutory minimum three month period was asserted, which likewise raised a substantial jurisdictional objection. On these bases the High Court entertained the writ, issued rule, and granted interim relief restraining reassessment, demand and penalty notices pending final disposal.
Arguable jurisdictional defects were identified in reassessment proceedings: the notice under Section 148 was challenged on the ground that only a Faceless Assessing Officer may issue such notices post 29 March 2022, rendering notices issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer prima facie void; this ground was held sufficient to invoke writ jurisdiction. Separately, the notice gave only thirty days to file a return, whereas a statutory minimum three month period was asserted, which likewise raised a substantial jurisdictional objection. On these bases the High Court entertained the writ, issued rule, and granted interim relief restraining reassessment, demand and penalty notices pending final disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
