Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
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 4821 
Join Channel 
