Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Reassessment for AY 2017-18 was held within limitation because the earlier notice issued on 29.04.2021 was treated as a deemed notice under section 148A(b) in light of Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal and Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal. The Court held that the saving of defences under section 149 did not help the assessee, as the notice remained issuable under the old regime up to 31.03.2024 where escaped income crossed the applicable threshold. It further held that alleged escaped income exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs and represented as immovable property attracted the extended ten-year period. The challenge to the order under section 148A(d), the consequential notice under section 148, and the assessment order on limitation grounds was rejected and the writ petition dismissed.
Reassessment for AY 2017-18 was held within limitation because the earlier notice issued on 29.04.2021 was treated as a deemed notice under section 148A(b) in light of Union of India v. Ashish Agarwal and Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal. The Court held that the saving of defences under section 149 did not help the assessee, as the notice remained issuable under the old regime up to 31.03.2024 where escaped income crossed the applicable threshold. It further held that alleged escaped income exceeding Rs. 50 lakhs and represented as immovable property attracted the extended ten-year period. The challenge to the order under section 148A(d), the consequential notice under section 148, and the assessment order on limitation grounds was rejected and the writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
