Validity of assessment order - mere fact that the demand notice ...

VAT and Sales Tax

October 27, 2016

Validity of assessment order - mere fact that the demand notice was sent in the year 2016 will not be enough to raise presumption that the order has been ante-dated. - HC

View Source

← Previous Next →

Validity of assessment order - mere fact that the demand notice ...

VAT and Sales Tax

October 27, 2016

You may also like:

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - validity of order u/s 148A(d) - Here is the case, where, by total non application of mind to the fact that in respect of subsequent...

Dishonour of Cheque - proceedings initiated by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Validity of handwritten note (Notice) sent by...

Issue of notice versus service of notice - Income escaping assessment - validity of notice u/s 147 - there has been proper issue of notice within the limitation period...

Non service of notice u/s 143(2) - Apparently, the notice was sent on the wrong address as the assessee has categorically given his address in the relevant return of...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Time limit for notice - there is no document made available to prove that the notice under section 148 dated 31.03.2018 was sent for...

Validity of reopening of assessment - Absence of notice u/s 143(2) - non-issuance of notice shall not vitiate the assessment proceedings after due service of notice u/s 147 - HC

Adequate rebut of Legal presumption - Deemed sale drawn by the authorities under Section 46(15)(d) of the AGST Act - the authorities have failed to discharge the obligation - HC

Reopening of assessment - validity of notice u/s 148A - computation of capital gain - the petitioner is categorical that he has not received any income in the AY 2016-17...

Validity of assessment order - Non responses to notices sent u/s 142(1) and 143(2) - Mistake on the part of Auditor / Tax Practitioner - The petitioner having failed to...

Withholding of the refund in terms of Section 241A - Merely because in the immediately preceding assessment year 2016-17, the assessee had declared a positive income as...

Quick Updates: