https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759316 The ITAT Mumbai quashed the assessment order passed under sections 144 and 147, ruling in favor of the assessee. The tribunal found that the AO failed to dispose of objections raised by the assessee through a speaking order before proceeding with assessment, rendering the assessment order without jurisdiction. The CIT(A)'s finding that objections were not filed during assessment proceedings was deemed factually incorrect and perverse. The tribunal relied on SC precedent in GVK Driveshaft and HC decisions in Bayer Material Sciences and Fomento Resorts Hotels. Additionally, the tribunal noted that in identical circumstances for AY 2011-12, exemption under section 10(38) for long-term capital gains was accepted despite penny stock allegations. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759316 The ITAT Mumbai quashed the assessment order passed under sections 144 and 147, ruling in favor of the assessee. The tribunal found that the AO failed to dispose of objections raised by the assessee through a speaking order before proceeding with assessment, rendering the assessment order without jurisdiction. The CIT(A)'s finding that objections were not filed during assessment proceedings was deemed factually incorrect and perverse. The tribunal relied on SC precedent in GVK Driveshaft and HC decisions in Bayer Material Sciences and Fomento Resorts Hotels. Additionally, the tribunal noted that in identical circumstances for AY 2011-12, exemption under section 10(38) for long-term capital gains was accepted despite penny stock allegations. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 30 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759316