Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
HC held that two assessment orders could not survive for the same tax period and same discrepancies against the same assessee. One impugned order for 2021-2022 was therefore quashed as duplicative, while the Department was left free to proceed under the other order, which also covered an additional discrepancy. Separately, an ex parte assessment was set aside on equitable grounds because the assessee claimed lack of awareness of the notice after GST registration cancellation, the merits had been explained, and a substantial part of the disputed tax had already been recovered. That matter was remanded for fresh consideration with a direction to file reply and documents, and the bank attachment was lifted.
HC held that two assessment orders could not survive for the same tax period and same discrepancies against the same assessee. One impugned order for 2021-2022 was therefore quashed as duplicative, while the Department was left free to proceed under the other order, which also covered an additional discrepancy. Separately, an ex parte assessment was set aside on equitable grounds because the assessee claimed lack of awareness of the notice after GST registration cancellation, the merits had been explained, and a substantial part of the disputed tax had already been recovered. That matter was remanded for fresh consideration with a direction to file reply and documents, and the bank attachment was lifted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
