Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Reassessment notices issued under the new regime were held time-barred because, for notices originally issued between 01/04/2021 and 30/06/2021, only the surviving time available up to 30/06/2021 could be used after excluding the stayed period and the two weeks allowed for response. Applying the Supreme Court rulings in Rajeev Bansal and Ashish Agarwal, the Tribunal held that the fresh notice had to be issued within the remaining limitation under section 149. In this case, the notice issued on 25/07/2022 exceeded that limit, so the reassessment proceedings and assessment orders were quashed, with other grounds left open.
Reassessment notices issued under the new regime were held time-barred because, for notices originally issued between 01/04/2021 and 30/06/2021, only the surviving time available up to 30/06/2021 could be used after excluding the stayed period and the two weeks allowed for response. Applying the Supreme Court rulings in Rajeev Bansal and Ashish Agarwal, the Tribunal held that the fresh notice had to be issued within the remaining limitation under section 149. In this case, the notice issued on 25/07/2022 exceeded that limit, so the reassessment proceedings and assessment orders were quashed, with other grounds left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.