Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Mandatory compliance with section 144C was violated where the Assessing Officer issued a so-called draft assessment order while already determining taxable income and tax payable, issuing a demand notice and initiating penalty proceedings. The Tribunal held that these steps could occur only after a final assessment order, so the document was in substance a final order passed without the required draft procedure. This was a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural irregularity, and section 292B could not cure it. The final assessment order, demand notice and penalty notice were therefore quashed, and the assessee's cross objection was allowed.
Mandatory compliance with section 144C was violated where the Assessing Officer issued a so-called draft assessment order while already determining taxable income and tax payable, issuing a demand notice and initiating penalty proceedings. The Tribunal held that these steps could occur only after a final assessment order, so the document was in substance a final order passed without the required draft procedure. This was a jurisdictional defect, not a mere procedural irregularity, and section 292B could not cure it. The final assessment order, demand notice and penalty notice were therefore quashed, and the assessee's cross objection was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.