{"id":50674,"date":"2025-02-04T14:17:38","date_gmt":"2025-02-04T08:47:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/acit-v-aim-fincon-p-ltd-2024-301-taxman-169-sc-editorial-aim-fincon-p-ltd-v-acit2024-166-taxmann-com-680-gujhc\/"},"modified":"2025-02-04T14:17:38","modified_gmt":"2025-02-04T08:47:38","slug":"acit-v-aim-fincon-p-ltd-2024-301-taxman-169-sc-editorial-aim-fincon-p-ltd-v-acit2024-166-taxmann-com-680-gujhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/acit-v-aim-fincon-p-ltd-2024-301-taxman-169-sc-editorial-aim-fincon-p-ltd-v-acit2024-166-taxmann-com-680-gujhc\/","title":{"rendered":"ACIT v. AIM Fincon (P.) Ltd. (2024) 301 Taxman 169 (SC) Editorial : AIM Fincon (P) Ltd v.ACIT(2024) 166 taxmann.com 680 (Guj)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Hon\u2019ble Gujarat High Court quashed the re-opening proceedings holding that the same were based on a set of facts which was already examined during the original assessment proceedings and therefore, there is a change of opinion on the assessing officer\u2019s part. Aggrieved, the Department filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon\u2019ble Supreme Court with a delay of 489 days which was not condoned. Accordingly, the special leave petition was dismissed.(AY. 2012-13)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 147: Reassessment-With in four years-Change of opinion-Reopening on same set of facts invalid-The reasons assigned for explaining the delay of 489 days in filing SLP  are neither satisfactory or sufficient in law for condonation-SLP of Revenue is dismissed.  [S. 68, Art. 136]<\/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-50674","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-dbk","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50674","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=50674"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50674\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":50675,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/50674\/revisions\/50675"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=50674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=50674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=50674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}