https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750962 The Bombay HC quashed a reopening order passed under Section 148A(d) where the AO failed to address the assessee's submissions. The petitioner argued that the first issue regarding FSI value was a change of opinion as it was already assessed, and the second issue was previously decided by ITAT in assessee's favor for AY 2011-2012. Since the AO did not deal with these submissions, the HC held the order unsustainable and quashed both the reopening order and consequential notice under Section 148. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration. Decision favored the assessee. en-us Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Apr 2024 08:21:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750962 The Bombay HC quashed a reopening order passed under Section 148A(d) where the AO failed to address the assessee's submissions. The petitioner argued that the first issue regarding FSI value was a change of opinion as it was already assessed, and the second issue was previously decided by ITAT in assessee's favor for AY 2011-2012. Since the AO did not deal with these submissions, the HC held the order unsustainable and quashed both the reopening order and consequential notice under Section 148. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration. Decision favored the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750962