| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 2802 2008 SLD 2802 (2008) 296 ITR 90 |
Bombay High Court
WRIT PETITION NOS. 91 TO 97 OF 2007 JANUARY 29, 2007
DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND, J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
S.E. Dastur, R. Murlidhar and A.K. Jasani for the Petitioner. D.M. Chatterji, Ms. P.P. Bhosle and R.E. Jalali for the
Respondent.
WRIT PETITION NOS. 91 TO 97 OF 2007 JANUARY 29, 2007
DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND, J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
S.E. Dastur, R. Murlidhar and A.K. Jasani for the Petitioner. D.M. Chatterji, Ms. P.P. Bhosle and R.E. Jalali for the
Respondent.
Asian Paints Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Law:
Section:
Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for If Assessing Officer does not accept objections filed to notice under section 148, he shall not proceed further in matter to pass assessment order within a very short period e.g. four weeks or so from date of receipt of service of said order on objections on assessee. The petitioner had filed their respective objections on 15-1-2007, with regard to the reopening of assessment. The petitioner pointed out that in some of the cases as soon as the objections were rejected by the concerned Income-tax Officer, even the assessment order had been passed within a very short time whereby the assessee was left without any remedy to challenge such an order of rejection: Held that if the Assessing Officer does not accept the objections filed to notice under section 148, he shall not proceed further in the matter for a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of service of the said order on objections on the assessee. JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent. Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent all the petitions are taken up for final hearing. 2. In all the above petitions, it is a case regarding reopening…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492