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...
Where a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) expressly accepted the returned income and made no addition or disallowance, the computation sheet could not override the assessment order. Once the regular assessment was completed, the earlier intimation under section 143(1) merged into it and lost independent existence, so the Assessing Officer could not rely on that earlier adjustment to justify a higher assessed income. The Tribunal further held that revising total income on these facts was not a mistake apparent from the record but a substantive re-determination of income, making section 154 unavailable. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable and the income had to remain as determined in the scrutiny assessment.
Where a scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) expressly accepted the returned income and made no addition or disallowance, the computation sheet could not override the assessment order. Once the regular assessment was completed, the earlier intimation under section 143(1) merged into it and lost independent existence, so the Assessing Officer could not rely on that earlier adjustment to justify a higher assessed income. The Tribunal further held that revising total income on these facts was not a mistake apparent from the record but a substantive re-determination of income, making section 154 unavailable. The rectification order was therefore unsustainable and the income had to remain as determined in the scrutiny assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
