Infrastructure facility: energy-efficient public lighting held integral to road projects, qualifying the operator as a developer and eligible for dedu...
Fourth Proviso to Section 153A: extended-period inquiry requires a reasonable, material-based satisfaction that escaped income likely exceeds the thre...
The final assessment order was invalid because the Assessing Officer passed it without first serving the draft assessment order, thereby denying the assessee the statutory opportunity to object before the Dispute Resolution Panel under Section 144C. The Court distinguished Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., noting that a draft order had in fact been prepared, so the proceedings were not to be quashed in entirety. Instead, the final assessment order and consequential penalty notice were set aside, the assessee was directed to be served with the draft order, and the statutory objection process was restored, with the intervening period excluded from limitation.
The final assessment order was invalid because the Assessing Officer passed it without first serving the draft assessment order, thereby denying the assessee the statutory opportunity to object before the Dispute Resolution Panel under Section 144C. The Court distinguished Sumitomo Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., noting that a draft order had in fact been prepared, so the proceedings were not to be quashed in entirety. Instead, the final assessment order and consequential penalty notice were set aside, the assessee was directed to be served with the draft order, and the statutory objection process was restored, with the intervening period excluded from limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
