SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Louis Dreyfus Company India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks rectification under section 154. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. court acknowledges respondent's acceptance of notice. (Para 5)
3. court directs decision on rectification application. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)

C.M.No.32048/2022

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 10976/2022

1. By way of the present petition, Petitioner seeks a direction to the Respondents to pass an order under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') in relation to the Assessment Years 2012-13. Petitioner also prays for deletion of demand of Rs.35,66,808/- and for issuance of consequential refunds/credit as may be due for the Assessment Year 2012-13 for non-adjustment of demand of Rs.35,66,808/- against the refunds due to the Petitioner until the rectification application is disposed of.

2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the case of the Petitioner was selected for re-assessment under section 147 and the National Faceless Assessment Centre passed the reassessment order for the Assessment Year 2012-13 making no addition to the returned income of the Pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top