https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271764 The court set aside the reassessment order for AY 2010-11 due to the failure to address objections raised by the petitioner to the reopening notice. The Revenue acknowledged the lack of jurisdiction in passing the order and agreed to rectify the error, but failed to implement preventive measures against such occurrences. Despite expressing disappointment at the lack of effort by the Revenue, the court ultimately made the rule absolute without imposing any costs, emphasizing the necessity of addressing objections before passing assessment orders in line with legal precedent. en-us Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Feb 2016 06:18:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271764 The court set aside the reassessment order for AY 2010-11 due to the failure to address objections raised by the petitioner to the reopening notice. The Revenue acknowledged the lack of jurisdiction in passing the order and agreed to rectify the error, but failed to implement preventive measures against such occurrences. Despite expressing disappointment at the lack of effort by the Revenue, the court ultimately made the rule absolute without imposing any costs, emphasizing the necessity of addressing objections before passing assessment orders in line with legal precedent. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271764