Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
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.