Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
Prior approval of the specified authority is a condition precedent for issuance of notice under section 148, and where more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, the approval must come from the authority prescribed under section 151(ii). As the approval for the section 148A(d) order was obtained from the Principal Commissioner instead of the competent authority, the reassessment initiation was jurisdictionally defective. The Tribunal held that this non-compliance vitiated jurisdiction and rendered the notice under section 148 void ab initio. Accordingly, the notice, the consequential reopening proceedings, and the reassessment order were quashed.
Prior approval of the specified authority is a condition precedent for issuance of notice under section 148, and where more than three years have elapsed from the end of the relevant assessment year, the approval must come from the authority prescribed under section 151(ii). As the approval for the section 148A(d) order was obtained from the Principal Commissioner instead of the competent authority, the reassessment initiation was jurisdictionally defective. The Tribunal held that this non-compliance vitiated jurisdiction and rendered the notice under section 148 void ab initio. Accordingly, the notice, the consequential reopening proceedings, and the reassessment order were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.