The Tribunal ruled that reassessment cannot survive when the final addition departs from the original Section 148A notice. Consistency of information throughout the reopening process is mandatory.
The Court held that assessment orders under Section 62 stand deemed withdrawn where returns and dues are filed within extended timelines. Delays were condoned, subject to payment of interest and late fees.
CESTAT held that dummy export documents prepared for internal charge calculation did not amount to fraud. With no evidence of misuse, penalties on the CFS and its officials were quashed.
This article explains how consumer law regulates brand endorsements. The key takeaway is that endorsers face penalties only when misleading claims are proven without due diligence.
The Tribunal sustained reassessment based on search information but faulted the disallowance of political donations. The key takeaway is that additions cannot rest solely on untested third-party statements without cross-examination.
Where real estate sale proceeds and donations are transparently reflected in financial statements, unexplained money provisions fail. The decision reinforces limits on Revenues powers based on conjecture.
The Tribunal held that an enforceable agreement to sell, supported by advance consideration, constitutes transfer under Section 2(47), entitling the assessee to Section 54 relief.
The Tribunal restored the Assessing Officers action after finding clear admission of issuing accommodation bills. Commission at 1% was rightly taxed on both bogus purchases and bogus sales.
The Tribunal held that a general survey admission by the seller cannot justify additions in every buyers case. Documentary proof of purchases and sales outweighed unsupported allegations.
The Tribunal held that an unsigned notice under Section 148 is invalid and does not confer jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the entire reassessment and additions were quashed as void ab initio.
