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 order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the consequential notice under Section 148 were liable to be set aside on the ground that the petitioner was not given a opportunity to respond to the notice issued under Section 148A(b) before the impugned order was passed.
Analysis: The petitioner stated that the notice under Section 148A(b) was served only after the time granted for filing a response had already expired, and that this difficulty was communicated to the Assessing Officer before the order under Section 148A(d) was made. The record indicated that this aspect was not taken into account before the impugned order was passed. In these circumstances, the appropriate course was to set aside the order and require a fresh decision after considering the petitioner's reply on merits and after granting personal hearing.
Conclusion: The order under Section 148A(d) was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after considering the petitioner's reply and affording personal hearing.