Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
HC quashed reassessment where the reopening was founded on a GST cancellation order that had already been reversed in appeal. The Court noted that the appellate GST order found no fraudulent ITC claim, no violation attracting adjudication, and no basis for the cancellation. The income-tax authority also failed to consider that appellate material, despite its direct relevance to the alleged escapement of income. With no independent material beyond the set-aside GST action, the initiation of reassessment was unwarranted. The order under Section 148A(3) and the consequential notice under Section 148 were set aside.
HC quashed reassessment where the reopening was founded on a GST cancellation order that had already been reversed in appeal. The Court noted that the appellate GST order found no fraudulent ITC claim, no violation attracting adjudication, and no basis for the cancellation. The income-tax authority also failed to consider that appellate material, despite its direct relevance to the alleged escapement of income. With no independent material beyond the set-aside GST action, the initiation of reassessment was unwarranted. The order under Section 148A(3) and the consequential notice under Section 148 were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
