Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96174 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.