Service of notice and contractual debt acknowledgment preserved insolvency admission against a corporate guarantor despite limitation and natural just...
Original works exemption excludes standalone boulder transportation, leaving subcontracted railway-project transport services subject to service tax l...
Annual production capacity determinations excluding stenter galleries support refunds for unconstitutional excise levies without an unjust-enrichment ...
Vicarious liability for cheque dishonour requires specific allegations of responsibility and cheque signatory; generic director allegations cannot sus...
IT Resilience Index requires market infrastructure institutions to automate resilience scoring, early warnings, and continuous service-delivery monito...
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging reassessment notices issued under sections 148A and 148 of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner contended that notices issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer should have been processed in a faceless manner as mandated by the Finance Act 2021. The HC followed its earlier precedent in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy, which held that proceedings under sections 148A and 148 conducted in non-faceless manner violated section 151A read with Notification 18/2022. The court quashed the impugned notices, noting that despite 16 months since the precedent judgment, the Income Tax Department continued issuing similar notices contravening statutory amendments. The relief granted remains subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court appeal against the Kankanala Ravindra Reddy decision.
The HC allowed the writ petition challenging reassessment notices issued under sections 148A and 148 of the Income Tax Act. The petitioner contended that notices issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer should have been processed in a faceless manner as mandated by the Finance Act 2021. The HC followed its earlier precedent in Kankanala Ravindra Reddy, which held that proceedings under sections 148A and 148 conducted in non-faceless manner violated section 151A read with Notification 18/2022. The court quashed the impugned notices, noting that despite 16 months since the precedent judgment, the Income Tax Department continued issuing similar notices contravening statutory amendments. The relief granted remains subject to the outcome of the pending Supreme Court appeal against the Kankanala Ravindra Reddy decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
