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...
A reassessment notice issued under section 148 beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required prior approval from the PCCIT under section 151(ii). Approval from the PCIT was insufficient because the controlling date for identifying the competent sanctioning authority is the date of issue of the section 148 notice. Sanction obtained at the section 148A stage could not replace the separate approval required for issuance of the reopening notice. The Tribunal therefore treated the notice as invalid and quashed the consequential reassessment.
A reassessment notice issued under section 148 beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year required prior approval from the PCCIT under section 151(ii). Approval from the PCIT was insufficient because the controlling date for identifying the competent sanctioning authority is the date of issue of the section 148 notice. Sanction obtained at the section 148A stage could not replace the separate approval required for issuance of the reopening notice. The Tribunal therefore treated the notice as invalid and quashed the consequential reassessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
