The Tribunal quashed the reassessment after finding that the Assessing Officer failed to issue notice under Section 143(2). The decision confirms that compliance with this statutory requirement is indispensable in reassessment proceedings.
The Tribunal quashed the reassessment after finding that the assessee had already filed the return under Section 139 before issuance of the notice. The key takeaway is that jurisdiction under Section 147 cannot be assumed on erroneous facts.
The Tribunal ruled that the Revenue cannot assess the full transaction value in the hands of a confirming party absent proof of beneficial ownership. The decision underscores the importance of establishing actual receipt of consideration.
ITAT deleted the addition after finding that neither possession nor ownership had passed during the relevant assessment year. The decision emphasizes that actual transfer, not mere intention to sell, determines taxability.
The Court emphasized that reassessment proceedings must comply with principles of natural justice by providing an effective opportunity of hearing. Ignoring explanations and documents submitted by the taxpayer vitiates the entire reopening process.
ITAT held that proving the mode of payment is not enough to secure deduction for political contributions where evidence points to a bogus donation scheme. Taxpayers must establish the authenticity of the entire transaction.
The Court ruled that an order passed over three years after the statutory deadline under Section 153(5) was without jurisdiction and void. It held that failure to act within the prescribed period renders the appellate order final and enforceable.
Karthik Papers Limited Vs Commercial Tax Officer (CESTAT Delhi) The appeal was filed by Shree Karthik Papers Limited against the portion of the order dated 16.09.2014 passed by the Tamil Nadu Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal (Additional Bench), Coimbatore, which restored the assessment on a turnover of ₹1,51,28,219 as inter-State sales and restored penalty of ₹25,64,365. […]
P P Jewellers & Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (CESTAT Delhi) The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi, examined multiple appeals challenging an order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Jodhpur. The Commissioner had confiscated seized silver jewellery, confirmed a customs duty demand of ₹1,44,04,165 along […]
Sanand Properties P. Ltd. Vs Jt. Commr. of I.T. Range 6 And Ors. (Supreme Court of India) Reopening of Assessment Valid Because Survey Unearthed Fresh Tangible Material: SC; 35% Share Taxable as Revenue Since Expenses Never Reduced Entitlement: SC; Receipts Linked to Gross Sales Held Taxable as Business Income, Not Profit Share; Assessment Reopening Sustained […]
