Proportionality in company penalty quantification requires aggravating and mitigating factors; mechanical multiplication of director liability is impe...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Where reopening rested solely on incriminating material seized in a search on another person, the special search assessment mechanism under section 153C prevailed over general reassessment under sections 147/148, and the reassessment was held bad in law. In the absence of the searched person's Assessing Officer's satisfaction note and any independent post-search material, jurisdiction under sections 147/148 could not be assumed on third-party search material alone. The objection of borrowed satisfaction was rejected because the Assessing Officer had issued notice, sought an explanation under section 148A(b), and passed a reasoned order under section 148A(d), showing independent application of mind.
Where reopening rested solely on incriminating material seized in a search on another person, the special search assessment mechanism under section 153C prevailed over general reassessment under sections 147/148, and the reassessment was held bad in law. In the absence of the searched person's Assessing Officer's satisfaction note and any independent post-search material, jurisdiction under sections 147/148 could not be assumed on third-party search material alone. The objection of borrowed satisfaction was rejected because the Assessing Officer had issued notice, sought an explanation under section 148A(b), and passed a reasoned order under section 148A(d), showing independent application of mind.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.