Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Jurisdiction for notice under section 148 was tested on the material available when proceedings began, not on the income ultimately assessed. The Tribunal held that section 149(1)(b) permitted notice beyond three years where the Assessing Officer possessed books, documents or evidence indicating income represented in the form of an asset and likely to meet the statutory threshold. Cash withdrawals exceeding Rs. 1.50 crores, together with non-filing of a return, constituted tangible material for a prima facie view that the threshold was satisfied. The assessee's time-bar objection failed, and the reassessment notice was upheld as valid.
Jurisdiction for notice under section 148 was tested on the material available when proceedings began, not on the income ultimately assessed. The Tribunal held that section 149(1)(b) permitted notice beyond three years where the Assessing Officer possessed books, documents or evidence indicating income represented in the form of an asset and likely to meet the statutory threshold. Cash withdrawals exceeding Rs. 1.50 crores, together with non-filing of a return, constituted tangible material for a prima facie view that the threshold was satisfied. The assessee's time-bar objection failed, and the reassessment notice was upheld as valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
