Constitutional personal-liberty safeguards limit PMLA twin bail conditions where completed investigations lead to prolonged incarceration before trial...
Automated airline software subscriptions without human intervention fail technical-services characterisation and do not make available underlying tech...
Business support recruitment and training receipts qualify for presumptive business taxation, not professional taxation under technical consultancy ru...
Treaty exemption for foreign permanent-establishment management fees prevailed, while dividend expense disallowance remained limited to an accepted al...
Centralised assessment transfers: participation after requesting centralisation can bar technical jurisdictional challenges, while assessment disputes...
Binding precedent remains operative despite pending challenge, supporting deletion of interest disallowance when debt is converted into preference sha...
Page of 4912
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
121 to 140 of 98239 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Under the former reassessment framework, time allowed or extended for an assessee's reply to a Section 148A(b) show-cause notice is excluded when computing the Section 149 limitation period. A notice is not invalid merely because the response period runs beyond the original limitation deadline. After that exclusion, where the remaining time does not exceed seven days, the sixth proviso provides a seven-day terminal period for issuing the Section 148A(d) order and consequential Section 148 notice. The exclusion does not create an open-ended period. Limitation must therefore be computed through the complete chronology of response periods, adjournments, extensions, reply-stage closure, and issuance of both the order and notice.
Under the former reassessment framework, time allowed or extended for an assessee's reply to a Section 148A(b) show-cause notice is excluded when computing the Section 149 limitation period. A notice is not invalid merely because the response period runs beyond the original limitation deadline. After that exclusion, where the remaining time does not exceed seven days, the sixth proviso provides a seven-day terminal period for issuing the Section 148A(d) order and consequential Section 148 notice. The exclusion does not create an open-ended period. Limitation must therefore be computed through the complete chronology of response periods, adjournments, extensions, reply-stage closure, and issuance of both the order and notice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.