https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49304 The Supreme Court held that the High Court correctly entertained the writ petition despite the complexity of facts and law as the 1st respondent sought protection of her fundamental rights. The reassessment orders were deemed void due to non-compliance with Section 24B of the Income-tax Act since not all executors were served with notices. The sufficiency of notices served on E. D. Sadanandan was questioned, and the effectiveness of the assessment order against him was debated. The case was remanded to the High Court for further consideration on various crucial points, with costs awarded to the 1st respondent. en-us Thu, 29 Oct 1964 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49304 The Supreme Court held that the High Court correctly entertained the writ petition despite the complexity of facts and law as the 1st respondent sought protection of her fundamental rights. The reassessment orders were deemed void due to non-compliance with Section 24B of the Income-tax Act since not all executors were served with notices. The sufficiency of notices served on E. D. Sadanandan was questioned, and the effectiveness of the assessment order against him was debated. The case was remanded to the High Court for further consideration on various crucial points, with costs awarded to the 1st respondent. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Oct 1964 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49304