Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of HC allowed the petition and quashed the second show cause notice dated 15.09.2005, holding it void for want of jurisdiction and barred by limitation. The court reasoned that the revenue could not initiate a fresh proceeding to invoke a purportedly changed law after the Tribunal had earlier set aside the original demand arising from the SCN dated 02.04.1998, and that permitting multiple proceedings for the same alleged infringement would contravene settled tax-law principles analogous to res judicata. The HC further held that Section 11A(11)(a) imposes a requirement of reasonable time to conclude proceedings, no satisfactory explanation was offered for delay beyond six months from 19.12.2016, and reliance on the Supreme Court decision was distinguishable.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
