https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93551 The HC held that the notice issued under Section 148A(b) and the consequential order were invalid because the petitioner was not afforded the statutory time to file a reply and was not heard prior to adjudication, thereby breaching the audi alteram partem principle and the concomitant rule against bias. The court found the statutory mandate of Section 148A(b) was not complied with, rendering the proceedings procedurally vitiated. Consequently, the impugned order passed under Section 148A(b) and the notice issued under Section 148 were quashed and set aside, and the matter remitted for reconsideration in accordance with statutory timelines and with an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. en-us Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:56 +0530 Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93551 The HC held that the notice issued under Section 148A(b) and the consequential order were invalid because the petitioner was not afforded the statutory time to file a reply and was not heard prior to adjudication, thereby breaching the audi alteram partem principle and the concomitant rule against bias. The court found the statutory mandate of Section 148A(b) was not complied with, rendering the proceedings procedurally vitiated. Consequently, the impugned order passed under Section 148A(b) and the notice issued under Section 148 were quashed and set aside, and the matter remitted for reconsideration in accordance with statutory timelines and with an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. Highlights Income Tax Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:56 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93551