Bombay High Court held that since issue already examined during the course of assessment proceedings, re-opening of assessment on same issue amounts to change of opinion. Thus, re-opening based on change of opinion is not sustainable.
Bombay High Court held that reopening of the assessment would be permissible without there being any new or additional material available to the Assessing Office. Accordingly, reassessment notice is set aside and writ petition is allowed.
The Bombay High Court has fixed accountability by directing interest recovery from an erring officer for delayed income tax refunds, emphasizing timely compliance.
Bombay High Court held that notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act beyond the time period specified under section 149(1) of the Income Tax Act is non-complaint and invalid. Accordingly, order passed thereon is liable to be quashed.
Bombay High Court dismisses revenue appeal, upholding tribunal finding that seized document alone insufficient to prove ₹33 lakh cash for land.
Bombay High Court allows a company to file delayed income tax returns for AYs 2017-18 and 2018-19 due to hardship, conditional on not claiming interest on refunds.
Bombay High Court rules rectification under Section 154 is valid even with pending appeal, if the issue hasn’t been considered and decided by CIT(A).
Bombay High Court remands Dev Marketing’s tax assessment after Income Tax Department admits a bonafide error in denying a requested video conference hearing.
Bombay High Court held that exporters are entitled to both input side and output side rebate under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 and not just one kind of rebate. Thus, present writ petition allowed.
Bombay High Court permitted audio-video appearance before investigating officer for recording of statement in view of Economic Offences Wing’s (EOW) directions to withhold the renewal of the petitioner’s passport. Accordingly, petition stands allowed.
