https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768137 The Bombay HC rejected petitioners' challenge to a 26 March 2014 notification that revoked their earlier approval dated 17 November 2006 for deductions under Section 80IA. The court held that the notification was validly issued and not ultra vires, finding no grounds for interference. The petitioners' contention that CBDT lacked power to issue the notification was unsupported. The court distinguished the case from Ackruti City Ltd, noting different factual circumstances. While ITAT had observed that rescinding the earlier notification was questionable given the Empowered Committee's clarification, the HC determined that factual disputes regarding compliance with scheme conditions should be addressed in assessment proceedings rather than through this petition. en-us Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Apr 2025 08:31:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768137 The Bombay HC rejected petitioners' challenge to a 26 March 2014 notification that revoked their earlier approval dated 17 November 2006 for deductions under Section 80IA. The court held that the notification was validly issued and not ultra vires, finding no grounds for interference. The petitioners' contention that CBDT lacked power to issue the notification was unsupported. The court distinguished the case from Ackruti City Ltd, noting different factual circumstances. While ITAT had observed that rescinding the earlier notification was questionable given the Empowered Committee's clarification, the HC determined that factual disputes regarding compliance with scheme conditions should be addressed in assessment proceedings rather than through this petition. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768137