https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763694 The HC held that a reassessment order passed ten months after the statutory limitation period expired was invalid. The court applied SC precedents to determine that expressions "in consequence of" and "to give effect to" in Section 153 require specific findings necessary for disposal of appeals. The Division Bench order lacked such findings to extend the limitation period. The assessment should have been completed within sixty days of the HC order under the first proviso, making the delayed assessment order beyond jurisdiction. The writ petition was allowed, quashing the time-barred reassessment order. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Mar 2025 12:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763694 The HC held that a reassessment order passed ten months after the statutory limitation period expired was invalid. The court applied SC precedents to determine that expressions "in consequence of" and "to give effect to" in Section 153 require specific findings necessary for disposal of appeals. The Division Bench order lacked such findings to extend the limitation period. The assessment should have been completed within sixty days of the HC order under the first proviso, making the delayed assessment order beyond jurisdiction. The writ petition was allowed, quashing the time-barred reassessment order. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763694