TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10 was liable to be set aside in view of the fresh revised notice proposing to redo the assessment; (ii) Whether the assessment orders for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 were vitiated for failure to follow the prescribed procedure of granting a specific date for personal hearing before finalising the assessments.
Issue (i): Whether the assessment order for the assessment year 2009-10 was liable to be set aside in view of the fresh revised notice proposing to redo the assessment.
Analysis: A fresh revised notice had been issued proposing to reopen and redo the assessment for the same year. In that situation, the earlier assessment order could not be allowed to stand, since the assessment itself was to be reconsidered afresh.
Conclusion: The assessment order for 2009-10 was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh assessment after permitting the assessee to file objections to the revised notice.
Issue (ii): Whether the assessment orders for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 were vitiated for failure to follow the prescribed procedure of granting a specific date for personal hearing before finalising the assessments.
Analysis: The objections had not been dealt with in a meaningful manner, and the assessing authority had not fixed a specific date for personal hearing as required by the departmental circular. The procedure adopted did not satisfy the requirement that objections be considered first and, where necessary, a separate notice be issued for personal hearing. The assessments therefore called for interference and fresh consideration.
Conclusion: The assessment orders for 2010-11 and 2011-12 were set aside and remanded for fresh consideration with a specific date fixed for personal hearing.
Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded to the extent of setting aside the assessment orders and remitting the matters for fresh adjudication, with directions to follow the proper hearing procedure and reconsider the assessments in accordance with law.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessment cannot be finalised by a combined notice that does not separately provide a specific date for personal hearing where the assessee's objections require consideration; failure to follow that procedure warrants setting aside the assessment and remand.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
