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: Whether the notice under Section 148A(b), the order under Section 148A(d), and the consequential notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were barred by limitation where the show-cause notice granted time to reply beyond the limitation date.
Analysis: The Court held that the time granted to the assessee for filing a reply under Section 148A(b) is to be excluded while computing limitation under the fifth proviso to Section 149(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It further held that once the reply was filed, the Assessing Officer had only seven days, as contemplated by the sixth proviso to Section 149(1), to pass an order under Section 148A(d) and issue notice under Section 148. The period between the notice under Section 148A(b) and the filing of reply was thus excluded, and the remaining period had to be reckoned thereafter.
Conclusion: The impugned notice under Section 148 and the order under Section 148A(d), both dated 30.04.2024, were held to be beyond limitation and invalid.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
