Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Assessment was held time-barred where clause (xii) of Explanation 1 to section 153 operated only as an exclusion of the period during which seized material was unavailable within the running limitation period, not as an enlargement of the total time for assessment; the order passed after the outer date was quashed. On merits, additions based on third-party seized cash entries were deleted because the material came from other entities, the witness retracted the earlier statement, and no independent corroboration connected the assessee to any cash receipt. Digital entries from a pen drive were inadmissible without a valid section 65B certificate, and presumptions under sections 132(4A) and 292C did not apply against the assessee. Section 56(2)(x) failed because actual receipt without consideration was not proved.
Assessment was held time-barred where clause (xii) of Explanation 1 to section 153 operated only as an exclusion of the period during which seized material was unavailable within the running limitation period, not as an enlargement of the total time for assessment; the order passed after the outer date was quashed. On merits, additions based on third-party seized cash entries were deleted because the material came from other entities, the witness retracted the earlier statement, and no independent corroboration connected the assessee to any cash receipt. Digital entries from a pen drive were inadmissible without a valid section 65B certificate, and presumptions under sections 132(4A) and 292C did not apply against the assessee. Section 56(2)(x) failed because actual receipt without consideration was not proved.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
