Search Results for "Section 148 Income-tax Act"

51 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 51 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Bombay Quashes Reopening Notice Against Assessee on Ground of Change of Opinion. Reassessment beyond four years not permissible when primary facts fully disclosed and no failure to disclose material facts.

The petitioner, a private limited company engaged in selling hair care products and providing consultancy services, challenged a notice dated 29 March...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reopening Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act for Lack of Fresh Material. Assessment Reopened Beyond Four Years Without Allegation of Failure to Disclose Material Facts Held Invalid.

The petitioner, Talati & Panthaky Associated Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging a notice date...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice for Stock Exchange in Income Tax Case — Reopening Beyond Four Years Invalid Without Failure to Disclose. Double Deduction Ground Already Decided in Assessee's Favour for Earlier Year.

The Bombay High Court allowed a writ petition filed by Bombay Stock Exchange Limited challenging a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 196...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reopening Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for Lack of Valid Reason to Believe. Notice Issued Beyond Four-Year Limit Without Allegation of Failure to Disclose Material Facts Held Invalid.

The petitioner, a partnership firm engaged in government contracts for water supply schemes, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2016-17 on...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act for Lack of Reasons to Believe Income Escaped Assessment. Reassessment Based on Change of Opinion Regarding Cost of Acquisition Under Section 55(2)(b)(ii) is Invalid.

The petitioner, J.B. Amin & Brothers (HUF), owned land at Aurangpura, Aurangabad, purchased by late Balubhai Amin for Rs.1,80,000. After his death in ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act for Lack of Fresh Material. Reassessment Based on Mere Change of Opinion Without New Tangible Material is Invalid.

The petitioner, Debashu Services Private Limited, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, is a regular assessee under the ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Reassessment Notice Under Section 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for Lack of Reasonable Belief and Change of Opinion. Reassessment Beyond Four Years Invalid Without Allegation of Failure to Disclose Material Facts.

The petitioner, Nivi Trading Limited, a private limited company, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2010-11 on 15th September 2010 declari...