Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Section 147A, enacted retrospectively to exclude faceless Assessing Officers from issuing reassessment notices, was declared unconstitutional for violating separation of powers. A validating enactment may neutralise a judicial ruling only by curing the underlying defect or removing its legal basis; Section 147A neither amended the statutory faceless reassessment scheme nor addressed its requirement of randomised automated allocation. Notices under Section 148 must be issued through faceless, randomised automated allocation under the scheme framed under Section 151A. Jurisdictional Assessing Officers therefore lacked concurrent authority to issue such notices, and notices issued outside that process were set aside.
Section 147A, enacted retrospectively to exclude faceless Assessing Officers from issuing reassessment notices, was declared unconstitutional for violating separation of powers. A validating enactment may neutralise a judicial ruling only by curing the underlying defect or removing its legal basis; Section 147A neither amended the statutory faceless reassessment scheme nor addressed its requirement of randomised automated allocation. Notices under Section 148 must be issued through faceless, randomised automated allocation under the scheme framed under Section 151A. Jurisdictional Assessing Officers therefore lacked concurrent authority to issue such notices, and notices issued outside that process were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
