The case involved conflicting reasons between the show-cause notice and final order, with no proper consideration of the reply. The court held such inconsistency invalid and restored the registration.
The Court held that a Section 148 notice issued beyond the statutory six-year limitation period is invalid. It ruled that expired limitation cannot be revived through later amendments, rendering the reassessment void.
The court held that reassessment notices for A.Y. 2015–16 issued after 1 April 2021 are invalid based on the Revenue’s concession before the Supreme Court. All consequential proceedings were set aside.
The court recorded the Revenue’s statement withdrawing the suspension of registration and ordered immediate restoration. It held that further action must follow due process and proper hearing.
The High Court refused to entertain the writ petition as the Revenue had an effective statutory remedy by way of appeal. It held that issues of legal interpretation must be pursued through appellate mechanisms.
The ITAT found that the Assessing Officer made disallowance under Section 94(7) without verifying facts. The matter was remanded for fresh examination with proper opportunity to the assessee.
CIT Vs Patel Engg. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) The appeals before the Bombay High Court arose from orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowing deduction under Section 80-IA(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the assessee for Assessment Years 2000–01 and 2001–02. The central issue was whether the assessee qualified as a […]
The court held that reassessment cannot be initiated on issues already examined during scrutiny. It ruled that reopening based on the same material amounts to a change of opinion and is invalid.
The Court held that blocking ITC without available credit in the ledger is beyond statutory powers. It ruled that negative blocking is impermissible and directed restoration of the credit.
The case examined the validity of reassessment notices issued beyond the permissible period. The Court ruled that such notices are invalid in light of binding precedent, leading to quashing of the entire reassessment.
