Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96508 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.