TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court rules against reopening assessment for AY 2003-2004 under Income-Tax Act</h1> <h3>Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd Versus The Deputy Director of Income Tax</h3> The High Court of Bombay ruled in a writ petition challenging a notice to reopen assessment for AY 2003-2004 under section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, ... - Issues involved: Challenge to notice u/s 148 of Income-Tax Act, 1961 seeking to reopen assessment for AY 2003-2004.Summary:The High Court of Bombay heard a writ petition challenging a notice dated 24.3.2010 issued u/s 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 to reopen the assessment for AY 2003-2004. The notice was based on the claim of double deduction by the assessee trust, which was considered as under assessment. However, the Court noted that the additions sought to be made had been held impermissible in a previous case and that the assessment was sought to be reopened beyond the permissible four years. As there was no failure on the part of the assessee to fully disclose material facts, the Court held that the notice under section 148 cannot be sustained.In detail, the notice sought to reopen the assessment for AY 2003-2004 based on the claim of double deduction by the assessee trust. The notice highlighted that the trust claimed capital expenditure as application of income and also depreciation on these assets, resulting in a double deduction which was considered as under assessment. The notice mentioned that the assessee had failed to fully disclose material facts, leading to the belief that income had escaped assessment.The Court observed that the additions sought to be made through the reopening of assessment had been previously held impermissible in a similar case. Additionally, the assessment was being reopened beyond the permissible four years. There was no evidence to suggest any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts necessary for assessment purposes. Therefore, the Court concluded that the notice issued u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 could not be sustained.Consequently, the High Court quashed and set aside the impugned notice dated 24/3/2010, making the rule absolute and ordering no costs to be paid.
TaxTMI 
