Andhra Pradesh High Court held that department cannot pass order under section 5 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PML Act) without recording of proper reasons. Accordingly, the order attaching the accounts is set aside.
It is held that while considering the material on record, one view is conclusively taken by AO, it would not be open for the AO to reopen the assessment based on the very same material and take another view.
PCIT from whom approval has been taken is not specified authority for approval under Section 148 and Section 148A of Income Tax Act, 1961.
Active Ads Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. (Calcutta High Court) HC find that this matter does not warrant to be heard on affidavits. The appeal was dismissed only on the ground of failure of the petitioner to make the pre-deposit. Taking a lenient view as to the default as the same will non-suit […]
HC find no substance in AO’s reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in as much as there is no mention of any tangible material that led to his conclusion. The entire process is triggered on a change of opinion as to the calculation of tax payable by the assessee.
Thermoking Vs Commissioner of State Goods And Service Tax (Delhi High Court) In this case concessional rate of duty had been denied to the petitioner on the ground that the C-Forms, relied upon by the petitioner, had been cancelled by the concerned tax authorities in Haryana with retrospective effect. Mr. Rajesh Mahna submits that the […]
Interstate purchase of capital goods by assessee shall not affect benefit under Section 15(1) of Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003: HC
Presumption that Petitioner beneficiary of accommodation entries based on statement of third party was disproved. Consequently, onus would be on AO to provide reasons to disbelieve bank statements and supporting documents for reopening the assessment.
whether the contention of Petitioner that Petitioner was unaware of these dates and therefore could not attend the appeal should be accepted.
Sourav Satapathy Vs Commissioner of CT & GST (Orissa High Court) Court finds that the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the demands raised by the authority vide Annexure-7 and Annexure-8. The contention of the petitioner is that he has already paid the amount vide Annexure-5 series. If the contention of the petitioner, that he […]
