Just a moment...
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 impugned order under section 148A(d) and the consequential notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration in view of the alleged denial of opportunity and procedural infirmities.
Analysis: The petitioner challenged the reassessment proceedings on the ground that the show cause notice was not properly served, no effective opportunity was afforded to file a reply, and the order under section 148A(d) suffered from non-application of mind and violation of natural justice. The respondents accepted that the petitioner had not had the opportunity to file a reply and did not object to a remand for a fresh decision. The Court, therefore, set aside the impugned order and consequential notice, granted liberty to file an additional reply, and directed a fresh reasoned decision in accordance with law.
Conclusion: The challenge succeeded procedurally, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after granting the petitioner an opportunity to respond.