{"id":35284,"date":"2023-08-01T16:55:46","date_gmt":"2023-08-01T11:25:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/saurashtra-infra-and-power-pvt-ltd-v-dy-cit-2023-451-itr-51-149-taxmann-com-388-bomhc\/"},"modified":"2023-08-01T16:55:46","modified_gmt":"2023-08-01T11:25:46","slug":"saurashtra-infra-and-power-pvt-ltd-v-dy-cit-2023-451-itr-51-149-taxmann-com-388-bomhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/saurashtra-infra-and-power-pvt-ltd-v-dy-cit-2023-451-itr-51-149-taxmann-com-388-bomhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Saurashtra Infra and Power Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023) 451 ITR 51 \/ 149 taxmann.com 388 (Bom)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Allowing the petition, the Court held that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer did not elucidate what material was not disclosed fully and truly by the assessee, failure to disclose which had led to the income escaping assessment. The basis for the reassessment proceedings was the audit objection and the entertaining of the special leave petition of the Department by the Supreme Court against the judgment in\u00a0CIT v. Continental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd.\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxlawsonline.com\/%5b2015%5d%20374%20ITR%200645\">[2015] 374 ITR 645<\/a>\u00a0(Bom) (HC). Even that objection lost its substratum since the appeal preferred by the Department in\u00a0CIT v. Container Corporation of India Ltd.\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.taxlawsonline.com\/%5b2018%5d%20404%20ITR%200397\">[2018] 404 ITR 397<\/a>\u00a0(SC) had since been dismissed. Accordingly, the notice under section\u00a0148\u00a0and the order rejecting the assessee\u2019s objections were unsustainable and accordingly quashed.( AY.2015-16)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147 : Reassessment\u2013After the expiry of four years- Infrastructure Development-Audit objection -No failure to disclose material facts\u2013Notice of reassessment based on Audit objection\u2013Reassessment notice and order disposing of the objection was quashed. [S. 80IA(4), 115JB, 148, Art. 226] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-35284","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-9b6","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35284","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=35284"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35284\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":35285,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35284\/revisions\/35285"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35284"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35284"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35284"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}