Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Under the amended reassessment regime, the High Court held that capital gains from the property transfer had to be computed with the stamp duty valuation under Sections 148, 149, 50C and 48. Because the petitioner's one-fourth share, valued on that basis, exceeded the statutory threshold of fifty lakh rupees, the extended limitation period applied and the Section 148A(d) order and consequential Section 148 notice were not without jurisdiction. The Court also held that the complaint that the written reply was not considered did not alter the result once limitation was decided against the petitioner. The writ petition was dismissed and assessment was directed to proceed, excluding the period spent before the Court for limitation purposes.
Under the amended reassessment regime, the High Court held that capital gains from the property transfer had to be computed with the stamp duty valuation under Sections 148, 149, 50C and 48. Because the petitioner's one-fourth share, valued on that basis, exceeded the statutory threshold of fifty lakh rupees, the extended limitation period applied and the Section 148A(d) order and consequential Section 148 notice were not without jurisdiction. The Court also held that the complaint that the written reply was not considered did not alter the result once limitation was decided against the petitioner. The writ petition was dismissed and assessment was directed to proceed, excluding the period spent before the Court for limitation purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
