https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190902 Reassessment notices were not quashed under Article 226 because alleged full disclosure of primary facts, including the receipt break-up, remained disputed and required evidentiary determination. Notice issued in the name of a dissolved firm and served on one former partner raised an arguable legal question with competing views, so writ interference was declined. Incorrect dating or characterisation of the reassessment did not invalidate the notices because they allowed filing within 35 days of service, caused no demonstrated prejudice, and left statutory remedies available. The reassessment notices remained effective. en-us Thu, 11 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Mar 2017 17:19:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190902 Reassessment notices were not quashed under Article 226 because alleged full disclosure of primary facts, including the receipt break-up, remained disputed and required evidentiary determination. Notice issued in the name of a dissolved firm and served on one former partner raised an arguable legal question with competing views, so writ interference was declined. Incorrect dating or characterisation of the reassessment did not invalidate the notices because they allowed filing within 35 days of service, caused no demonstrated prejudice, and left statutory remedies available. The reassessment notices remained effective. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Jul 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190902