Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
A reassessment notice issued beyond three years from the end of assessment year 2018-19 required prior sanction from the PCCIT/CCIT under section 151(ii), not the PCIT. The Tribunal held that obtaining sanction from an authority not prescribed by law rendered the section 148 notice void, and section 149 could not dilute or override the sanction requirement in section 151. It further held that the Finance Act, 2023 proviso to section 151 had no retrospective application. Because the reassessment initiation was jurisdictionally invalid, the revisionary order under section 263 founded on those proceedings was also unsustainable and was set aside.
A reassessment notice issued beyond three years from the end of assessment year 2018-19 required prior sanction from the PCCIT/CCIT under section 151(ii), not the PCIT. The Tribunal held that obtaining sanction from an authority not prescribed by law rendered the section 148 notice void, and section 149 could not dilute or override the sanction requirement in section 151. It further held that the Finance Act, 2023 proviso to section 151 had no retrospective application. Because the reassessment initiation was jurisdictionally invalid, the revisionary order under section 263 founded on those proceedings was also unsustainable and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
