Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
For reopening beyond three years, the statutory threshold under section 149(1)(b) must be met by material showing escaped income of Rs. 50 lakhs or more. The Tribunal held that the reopening was initiated on incorrect or non-existing portal information, because the assessment ultimately treated only Rs. 17,17,597 as unexplained after verification and explanation by the assessee. As the case did not satisfy the extended-limitation condition, it fell within section 149(1)(a) and the notice under section 148 issued beyond three years was invalid. The consequential reassessment order under section 147 read with section 144B was quashed as void ab initio.
For reopening beyond three years, the statutory threshold under section 149(1)(b) must be met by material showing escaped income of Rs. 50 lakhs or more. The Tribunal held that the reopening was initiated on incorrect or non-existing portal information, because the assessment ultimately treated only Rs. 17,17,597 as unexplained after verification and explanation by the assessee. As the case did not satisfy the extended-limitation condition, it fell within section 149(1)(a) and the notice under section 148 issued beyond three years was invalid. The consequential reassessment order under section 147 read with section 144B was quashed as void ab initio.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
