Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Non-disposal of an assessee's objections to reassessment reopening before completion of the assessment vitiates the reassessment, because disposal by a separate speaking order is a mandatory requirement and not a mere procedural formality. Applying its earlier decision in ITO v. Hardeep Singh, the ITAT held that the Assessing Officer had not decided the objections before finalising the reassessment. The annulment of the reassessment was therefore upheld, and the Revenue's reliance on Home Finders Housing Ltd. was not accepted.
Non-disposal of an assessee's objections to reassessment reopening before completion of the assessment vitiates the reassessment, because disposal by a separate speaking order is a mandatory requirement and not a mere procedural formality. Applying its earlier decision in ITO v. Hardeep Singh, the ITAT held that the Assessing Officer had not decided the objections before finalising the reassessment. The annulment of the reassessment was therefore upheld, and the Revenue's reliance on Home Finders Housing Ltd. was not accepted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.