Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
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 4817 
Join Channel 
