CIT vs. Scindia HUF (Bombay High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 9, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

The issue of notice under s. 16 (2) W. T. Act {s. 143 (2) I. T. Act} is mandatory for reassessment proceedings. If notice u/s 16 (2) {143 (2)} is not issued, the assessment order passed u/s 17 {s. 147} is not valid.

Note: Bandana Gagoi 289 ITR 28 (Gau) was followed.

See also: ACIT vs. Aurangabad Holiday Resorts (ITAT Pune), Atul Glass Industries vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi), Vin Vish Corporation vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) & Tulika Mishra vs. JCIT (ITAT Delhi).

0 comments on “CIT vs. Scindia HUF (Bombay High Court)
1 Pings/Trackbacks for "CIT vs. Scindia HUF (Bombay High Court)"
  1. […] The judgement in Scindia (Bom HC) was […]

Discover more from itatonline.org

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading