PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court held that an Assessing Officer could not invoke Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to rectify a determination made by the Principal Commissioner under Section 5(2) of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The scheme itself contains no rectification power, and Section 5(3) makes the amount determined and the order passed under the scheme final and conclusive. As the Act of 2020 does not apply the rectification provisions of the Income-tax Act to such determinations, the rectification order was without authority and was quashed.
The High Court held that an Assessing Officer could not invoke Section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to rectify a determination made by the Principal Commissioner under Section 5(2) of the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020. The scheme itself contains no rectification power, and Section 5(3) makes the amount determined and the order passed under the scheme final and conclusive. As the Act of 2020 does not apply the rectification provisions of the Income-tax Act to such determinations, the rectification order was without authority and was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.