Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
ITAT held that depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation remained allowable where the claim concerned the same block of intangible asset already accepted in the foundational year, with no new goodwill or distinguishing change shown. It further held that reassessment was barred by limitation under the post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA framework because the section 148 notice was issued beyond the surviving period, making the reassessment invalid. The Tribunal also affirmed that assessment framed in the name of a company which had already converted into an LLP was a nullity for want of jurisdiction. Finally, it upheld deletion of the section 14A disallowance because the Assessing Officer invoked Rule 8D without first recording the mandatory dissatisfaction under section 14A(2).
ITAT held that depreciation on goodwill arising from amalgamation remained allowable where the claim concerned the same block of intangible asset already accepted in the foundational year, with no new goodwill or distinguishing change shown. It further held that reassessment was barred by limitation under the post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA framework because the section 148 notice was issued beyond the surviving period, making the reassessment invalid. The Tribunal also affirmed that assessment framed in the name of a company which had already converted into an LLP was a nullity for want of jurisdiction. Finally, it upheld deletion of the section 14A disallowance because the Assessing Officer invoked Rule 8D without first recording the mandatory dissatisfaction under section 14A(2).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
