Case Law Details
Case Name : CIT (LTU) vs. IDBI Ltd. (Bombay High Court)
Related Assessment Year : 1993-94
Courts :
All High Courts Bombay High Court
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
CA Saurabh Chokhra
Brief of the case:
The Hon’ble Bombay HC in the above cited case held that supplying of reasons for reopening assessment is a jurisdictional requirement and non-supplying of the same when the assessee specifically asked for the same would made the reassessment notice bad in law.
Facts of the case:
For AY 1993-94 the regular assessment u/s 143(3) was completed by an order dated 26 March 1996. Thereafter, on 9 December 1996, the Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s. 147 read with Section 148 of the Act, seeking to reopen the assessment for the Assessment Year 1993-94....
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Author Bio
Sir, still the department believes that there is no mandate for providing reasons alongwith the notice under sec 148.
Also Sir, is there any law or rule to defend a notice under section 148 which does not have the designation of the officer issuing such notice.Regards,