Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
International cargo transhipment through Indian ports continues with Customs-controlled storage, re-export safeguards, and coordinated multi-station m...
For assessment year 2015-16, a reassessment notice issued under section 148 on 15.04.2022 was held time-barred because it was issued after six years from the end of the assessment year. The Tribunal followed the jurisdictional High Court's view that, for assessment years beginning on or before 01.04.2021, the first proviso to section 149 preserves the earlier limitation bar and the amended ten-year reopening period cannot operate retrospectively to revive a barred case. It also held that the exclusion provisions for time spent in section 148A proceedings do not override that limitation bar. The reassessment was therefore quashed.
For assessment year 2015-16, a reassessment notice issued under section 148 on 15.04.2022 was held time-barred because it was issued after six years from the end of the assessment year. The Tribunal followed the jurisdictional High Court's view that, for assessment years beginning on or before 01.04.2021, the first proviso to section 149 preserves the earlier limitation bar and the amended ten-year reopening period cannot operate retrospectively to revive a barred case. It also held that the exclusion provisions for time spent in section 148A proceedings do not override that limitation bar. The reassessment was therefore quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
