Validity of reopening of assessment - proper service of notice - ...

Income Tax

October 25, 2018

Validity of reopening of assessment - proper service of notice - Scope of Section 282(2) - service of notice at the factory premises of the Assessee on the security guard - Apex Court dismissed the SLP of the assessee.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Validity of reopening of assessment - proper service of notice - ...

Income Tax

October 25, 2018

You may also like:

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

Validity of Reopening of assessment - Service of notice under section 148 of the Act on the assessee is a jurisdictional requirement and must be mandatory complied with...

Validity of assessment - Non service of notice u/s 143(2) - unless there is service of notice in accordance with provision under Section 282 of the Act separately...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - objection regarding no service of notice u/s 148 - assessee has filed an affidavit denying service of notice - unless, the notice is...

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...

Validity of reopening of assessment - service of notice - Since no one was on behalf of the assessee was available at the given address, therefore, notice was served by...

Validity of reopening of assessment - notice against non existent entity / amalgamated company - Notices issued.

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - Mode and manner of service of notice as contemplated in Sec. 282(1)(b) - affixed the notice at an address where the assessee was not...

Reopening of assessment - non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2) - assessment could not be sustained for lack of service of statutory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act - AT

Validity of reopening - Validity of notice u/s 148 when scrutiny assessment was made but same was annulled - doctrine of merger is not applicable - reopening of the case...

Quick Updates: