2026 (7) TMI 1985

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....A. No. 5144/2016 is filed by the appellant - assessee calling in question the correctness of the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 109810/2016, whereby the learned Single Judge had rejected the challenge made to the notice dated 30.09.2015 issued by the Revenue Department under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') seeking to reopen and reassess the assessment in respect of the assessment year 2009-10. 2. W.A. No. 5145/2016 is filed challenging the order passed in W.P. No. 109811/2016 wherein an identical challenge to the notice to initiate proceedings under Section 148 of the Act was made with respect to assessment year 2010-11. 3. As the learned Single Judge has passed a common order with respect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ase had set aside identical notices as has been challenged in the present writ proceedings, after referring to the case of the Bombay High Court in the case of Sesa Sterile Ltd. V. ACIT - (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom.) which order was confirmed by the Apex Court by its order dated 05.03.2025 in the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and another v. M/s. Venture Real Estate and another - SLP(C) No. 4575/2020. The Consideration by the learned Single Judge, it is submitted would justify remitting the matter back to the learned Single Judge. 6. It is further submitted that though the writ petitions were filed challenging the notice under Section 148 of the Act, during the pendency of the writ appeals, this Court had permitted the Assessi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertion regarding the observations in the case of Sesa Sterile (supra) relating to the Shah Commission Report having been confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of M/s. Venture Real Estate (supra) by its order dated 05.03.2025 affirming the view taken by the Bombay High Court as well as Allahabad High Court is also not controverted. If that were to be so, such developments in law have a bearing upon the issue that is being adjudicated by the learned Single Judge relating to the reassessment orders of the same petitioner for the same year. 10. Accordingly, we find that the learned Single Judge's order requires reconsideration in light of the subsequent developments as noticed above. Though the learned Single Judge had recorded a findi....