Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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 4819 
Join Channel 
