Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
P.SAM KOSHY, NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Hyderabad Race Club – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basic factual context surrounding the case. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented by the petitioner on the legality of the notice. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments from the respondent's counsel regarding jurisdiction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. identification of legal questions and statutory provisions pertinent to the case. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. court’s assessment of the statutory obligations and authority. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 6. ruling on the legality of the second notice and finality of the assessment. (Para 20) |
| 7. conclusion and final order of the court. (Para 21 , 22) |
ORDER:
(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice P.Sam Koshy)
Heard Mr. S.Ravi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner; and Ms. J.Sunita, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the second notice dated 03.10.2008, passed by the respondent under Section 148 of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (for short the ‘Act’) as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Section 147 , 148 and 153(2) of the Act.
3. The facts of the case, are
Statutory time limits for reassessment are fundamental; once expired, subsequent notices for the same assessment year are invalid and undermine taxpayers' certainty.
Reassessment notice under section 148 invalid if approval taken from Principal Commissioner instead of Principal Chief Commissioner when issued after three years from end of assessment year; no retro....
Reassessment notice u/s 148 beyond three years requires approval from Principal Chief Commissioner u/s 151(ii); approval from Principal Commissioner invalid, rendering proceedings void. 2023 proviso ....
Reopening of assessment under Section 148 is invalid if based on materials already available during the original assessment, constituting a mere change of opinion without fresh evidence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
