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...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1501 to 1520 of 96363 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 4819 
Join Channel 
