{"id":46691,"date":"2024-09-22T22:50:43","date_gmt":"2024-09-22T17:20:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/francisco-xavier-pacheco-v-state-of-goa-2024-298-taxman-660-339-ctr-572-bom-hc\/"},"modified":"2024-09-22T22:50:43","modified_gmt":"2024-09-22T17:20:43","slug":"francisco-xavier-pacheco-v-state-of-goa-2024-298-taxman-660-339-ctr-572-bom-hc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/francisco-xavier-pacheco-v-state-of-goa-2024-298-taxman-660-339-ctr-572-bom-hc\/","title":{"rendered":"Francisco Xavier Pacheco v. State of Goa (2024) 298 Taxman 660 \/339 CTR 572 (Bom.)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Reassessment proceedings were initiated against assessee\u00a0 Assessee filed writ\u00a0 petition contending that Crime Branch had seized certain documents, computers, hard disks, etc. from assessee and until all those were released, assessee would not be in a position to effectively respond to notices of reassessment. Assessee sought for a direction to revenue to release all seized documents, data, articles and further to stay all further de novo assessment proceedings. Court held that\u00a0 there was a vague and omnibus statement in petition that assessee pursued matter for release in terms of order passed by Judicial Magistrate, however, this vague and omnibus statement was not backed by any material, documents, etc.\u00a0 There was nothing on record to indicate that assessee took any serious steps for obtaining documents\/material\/hard disks from crime branch.Since it was apparent that assessee simply wanted to stall reassessment proceedings\/ de novo proceedings at any cost, writ Court could not assist assessee in such endeavours.\u00a0 (AY. 2010-11)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 148 : Reassessment-Notice-Seized documents, computers, hard disks etc.-Not taken serious measures to release the documents seized-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 147, 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-46691","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-c95","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46691","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=46691"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46691\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":46692,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/46691\/revisions\/46692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=46691"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=46691"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=46691"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}