Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
HC held that reassessment notice issued beyond four years could not stand unless the proviso to Section 147 was satisfied. Because the recorded reasons did not allege failure by the assessee to make a full and true disclosure, and the material relied on was already before the AO in the original scrutiny assessment, the jurisdictional precondition for reopening was absent. The Court also held that reopening on the basis of the same material was a mere change of opinion, which cannot justify reassessment. The reassessment under Section 147 was therefore without jurisdiction and was rightly set aside; the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
HC held that reassessment notice issued beyond four years could not stand unless the proviso to Section 147 was satisfied. Because the recorded reasons did not allege failure by the assessee to make a full and true disclosure, and the material relied on was already before the AO in the original scrutiny assessment, the jurisdictional precondition for reopening was absent. The Court also held that reopening on the basis of the same material was a mere change of opinion, which cannot justify reassessment. The reassessment under Section 147 was therefore without jurisdiction and was rightly set aside; the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.