https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754086 HC held that reassessment orders u/s 148A(d) were invalid where reasons differed from those stated in notices u/s 148A(b). The original notices proposed taxing receipts under capital gains provisions, but orders invoked Section 56(2)(x)(a) for the first time. Court emphasized that Section 148A(b) notices serve mandatory purpose of informing assessees of grounds for reassessment, not mere formality. Different reasons in orders versus notices would defeat this purpose. Court treated impugned orders as fresh notices u/s 148A(b), directing appellants to file objections within six weeks, with revenue to decide within six weeks thereafter after providing hearing opportunity. en-us Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jun 2024 08:45:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754086 HC held that reassessment orders u/s 148A(d) were invalid where reasons differed from those stated in notices u/s 148A(b). The original notices proposed taxing receipts under capital gains provisions, but orders invoked Section 56(2)(x)(a) for the first time. Court emphasized that Section 148A(b) notices serve mandatory purpose of informing assessees of grounds for reassessment, not mere formality. Different reasons in orders versus notices would defeat this purpose. Court treated impugned orders as fresh notices u/s 148A(b), directing appellants to file objections within six weeks, with revenue to decide within six weeks thereafter after providing hearing opportunity. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754086