https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5482 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and ruling in favor of the assessee against the Revenue, with no costs incurred. The Court held that the assessments, although mistakenly labeled under section 16(3), were valid under section 16(1), and the absence of a notice under section 16(2) did not render them defective. The Commissioner's apprehension regarding potential legal challenges to assessments made under section 16(3) without a notice under section 16(2) was deemed remote and unsubstantiated. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5482 The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's judgment and ruling in favor of the assessee against the Revenue, with no costs incurred. The Court held that the assessments, although mistakenly labeled under section 16(3), were valid under section 16(1), and the absence of a notice under section 16(2) did not render them defective. The Commissioner's apprehension regarding potential legal challenges to assessments made under section 16(3) without a notice under section 16(2) was deemed remote and unsubstantiated. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Tue, 31 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=5482