Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Remand by a tribunal to the Transfer Pricing Officer is legally distinct from a reference initiated by the Assessing Officer; therefore the time-limit for giving effect to a tribunal remand is governed by the statutory provision applicable to fresh orders on appellate remand (the provision corresponding to Section 153(3) and the related giving-effect provision) and not by the extension mechanism that applies only to AO references. Applying the jurisdictional nature of limitation, the court found the period to give effect had expired on 31-03-2024, quashed the communication rejecting refund and directed payment of the excess tax with interest and timelines for compliance.
Remand by a tribunal to the Transfer Pricing Officer is legally distinct from a reference initiated by the Assessing Officer; therefore the time-limit for giving effect to a tribunal remand is governed by the statutory provision applicable to fresh orders on appellate remand (the provision corresponding to Section 153(3) and the related giving-effect provision) and not by the extension mechanism that applies only to AO references. Applying the jurisdictional nature of limitation, the court found the period to give effect had expired on 31-03-2024, quashed the communication rejecting refund and directed payment of the excess tax with interest and timelines for compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.