https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766218 Where the Department had invoked requisition power under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, use of Section 451 CrPC as a procedural route to obtain custody of seized money did not negate that invocation. The commentary states that the different custody mechanism was only a device to effectuate the requisition, so the pre-notice procedure under Section 148A was not required before issuing reassessment notices under Section 148. On that basis, the challenge to the notices failed and the notices were treated as valid. en-us Tue, 18 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Feb 2025 08:02:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766218 Where the Department had invoked requisition power under Section 132A of the Income-tax Act, use of Section 451 CrPC as a procedural route to obtain custody of seized money did not negate that invocation. The commentary states that the different custody mechanism was only a device to effectuate the requisition, so the pre-notice procedure under Section 148A was not required before issuing reassessment notices under Section 148. On that basis, the challenge to the notices failed and the notices were treated as valid. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766218