Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A scrutiny notice issued without established prior administrative approval was held void ab initio, and the resulting assessment under section 143(3) was annulled for want of jurisdiction. Additions based on third-party seized material also failed because the Assessing Officer had not recorded the requisite satisfaction with competent approval, so the statutory jurisdictional preconditions were not met. The first appellate authority exceeded its power by converting an unexplained-money addition into a trading addition and by introducing a new basis of assessment. Alleged suppressed sales, unexplained money, unaccounted purchases, and estimated unexplained expenditure were deleted because the loose papers were uncorroborated, cross-examination weakened the nexus, and section 69C was applied on conjecture rather than proof.
A scrutiny notice issued without established prior administrative approval was held void ab initio, and the resulting assessment under section 143(3) was annulled for want of jurisdiction. Additions based on third-party seized material also failed because the Assessing Officer had not recorded the requisite satisfaction with competent approval, so the statutory jurisdictional preconditions were not met. The first appellate authority exceeded its power by converting an unexplained-money addition into a trading addition and by introducing a new basis of assessment. Alleged suppressed sales, unexplained money, unaccounted purchases, and estimated unexplained expenditure were deleted because the loose papers were uncorroborated, cross-examination weakened the nexus, and section 69C was applied on conjecture rather than proof.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
