Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the reassessment was barred by limitation in view of the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 served on 06.04.2011 and whether the merits of the additions required fresh adjudication.
Analysis: The notice first served on 25.03.2011 and a second notice served on 06.04.2011 were both dated 22.03.2011. The time limit for completion of reassessment was held to run from the date of service of the latter notice, and the assessment orders passed on 28.03.2013 were within the permissible period under section 153(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The first issue was therefore decided against the assessee. Since the first appellate authority had not adjudicated the grounds challenging the additions on merits, those issues were sent back for consideration.
Conclusion: The reassessment was held to be within limitation. The challenge to the additions was remitted for fresh decision by the first appellate authority.