Chhattisgarh HC allows
assessee-company’s writ, quashes re-assessment proceedings for AY 2009-10, as
“no notice was served to the petitioner-assessee u/s. 148(1) and service of
notice to the Chartered Accountant (‘CA’) of the petitioner Company is not
service at all..”; Revenue had issued notice in March 2016 on assessee’s
incorrect address which was returned back by the post office, subsequently,
notice was served to assessee, through its CA, in April 2016 [i.e. after period
of limitation u/s. 149(1)]; Rejects Revenue’s stand that since assessee had
participated in the assessment proceedings after service of notice through CA,
filed its return and also raised objections, the assessee is deemed to have
waived service of notice in view of Sec. 292BB; Refers to the proviso to Sec.
292BB, observes that since assessee submitted its objection to AO regarding the
failure to effect service of notice upon it prior to completion of assessment
proceedings, Sec. 292BB presumption is not applicable; Relies on Delhi HC
ruling in Chetan Gupta, Gauhati HC ruling in Mintu Kalita and Allahabad HC
ruling in Laxmi Narain Anand Prakash, moreover HC observes that the notice was
served beyond the limitation period u/s. 149(1):HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Requirement to dematerialize shares of private limited companies
The Ministry of Corporate Affairs in October 2023 had mandated private companies and their shareholders to dematerialize their shareholding...
-
Particulars in Part 1 and Part 2 of Step-2 of registration form are required to be exactly the same as reported in the TDS statement. Plea...
-
1. Introduction: Every trust/charitable society/ NGO that wishes to claim the tax exemption benefits has to file Form 10A to seek fresh re...
-
LEASE-DEED (A brief Introduction) Lease defined. A lease of immovable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property, mad...
-
NECESSITY : Sometimes, in view of the expansion of the business, multiple increase in turnover and need for getting finances from the ...
-
· Mumbai ITAT in the case of Mukesh Harilal Mehta held that Exemption U/S 54 cannot be denied merely due to mistake by the developer.
-
Filing income tax returns (ITR) within the specified timelines under the Income-tax Act is not just a legal obligation but also crucial fo...
-
Earlier this year, the Mauritius Government approved the amendment to the India – Mauritius tax treaty, aligning it with the proposal of th...
-
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent instruction issued by the SEZ Division, Department of Commerce, clarifying various concerns relating t...
-
This Tax Alert summarizes a recent judgement of the Delhi High Court (HC) [1] dealing with the issue of denial of input tax credit (ITC) ...
-
Slump sale is transfer of one or more business undertakings for a lump sum consideration, without assigning individual values to the each...
No comments:
Post a Comment