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...
Where an attached residential property remained in the applicant's self-occupation, the Tribunal applied Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary to hold that taking physical possession before confiscation is exceptional, not routine. As no exceptional circumstance was shown and the Directorate did not establish any basis to displace the occupant, the applicant could retain possession and no notional rent could be demanded for the self-occupied property. The Tribunal also noted that the pending modification application had not been adjudicated earlier. The rights of mortgagee banks and secured creditors to proceed in accordance with law were left unaffected.
Where an attached residential property remained in the applicant's self-occupation, the Tribunal applied Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary to hold that taking physical possession before confiscation is exceptional, not routine. As no exceptional circumstance was shown and the Directorate did not establish any basis to displace the occupant, the applicant could retain possession and no notional rent could be demanded for the self-occupied property. The Tribunal also noted that the pending modification application had not been adjudicated earlier. The rights of mortgagee banks and secured creditors to proceed in accordance with law were left unaffected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
