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>Supreme Court Rejects Petition Due to 123-Day Filing Delay and Lack of Merit; All Applications Disposed Of.</h1> <h3>DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2 (1) (1), AHMEDABAD Versus GOKUL AGRO RESOURCES LIMITED</h3> The SC dismissed the Special Leave Petition due to a 'gross delay of 123 days' in filing, which was inadequately explained by the petitioner. The Court ... Validity of Reopening of assessment - case of the petitioner is not selected for scrutiny for the year under consideration - scope of amended provisions of the Income Tax Act - delay filling SLP - As decided by HC [2024 (4) TMI 1214 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] on same material only because the year under consideration being A.Y. 2018-19 no scrutiny assessment is undertaken by AO and this being a new regime of reassessment after 1st April, 2021, no different treatment can be given for reopening only because the scope is enlarged by the amended provisions for reopening - when the earlier assessment years which are subjected to reopening for which the notice is already quashed on the same material, there cannot be a reopening for the year under consideration - HELD THAT:- There is a gross delay of 123 days in filing the Special Leave Petition which has not been satisfactorily explained by the petitioner. Even otherwise, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merits. In the Supreme Court case presided over by Hon'ble Justices J. B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, the petitioner, represented by Mr. N Venkataraman, A.S.G., and other counsel, sought a Special Leave Petition. The Court noted a 'gross delay of 123 days' in filing the petition, which was 'not satisfactorily explained' by the petitioner. Furthermore, the Court found 'no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court.' Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed on grounds of both delay and merits. All pending applications were also disposed of.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
