{"id":59469,"date":"2026-04-13T12:32:57","date_gmt":"2026-04-13T07:02:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/manoj-kumar-bagree-v-ito2025-176-taxmann-com-58-347-ctr-792-254-dtr-265-calhc\/"},"modified":"2026-04-13T12:32:57","modified_gmt":"2026-04-13T07:02:57","slug":"manoj-kumar-bagree-v-ito2025-176-taxmann-com-58-347-ctr-792-254-dtr-265-calhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/manoj-kumar-bagree-v-ito2025-176-taxmann-com-58-347-ctr-792-254-dtr-265-calhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Manoj Kumar Bagree v. ITO(2025) 176 taxmann.com 58 \/ 347 CTR 792 \/ 254 DTR 265 (Cal)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>Court held that upon issuance of notice under section 148A(b), time or extended time allowed to assessee to file response is to be excluded while computing period of limitation under section 149(1), in addition to any period of stay granted by Court.\u00a0 Further, in terms of fourth proviso to section 149(1), if remaining time for passing order under section 148A(d) is less than 7 days, such remaining period shall stand extended to a further period of 7 days and period of limitation shall be deemed to be extended accordingly. Therefore, Assessing Officer was entitled to exclude 25 days for computing limitation, and order dated 6-4-2023 was within time. Dismissing the writ the Court held that\u00a0 since assessee also had alternate remedy\u00a0 he should pursue same before statutory authority. \u00a0(AY. 2019-20)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Limitation-Assessee was given extended time to respond to notice under section 148A(b)-Time was excludable for computing limitation under section 149(1)-Order passed under section 148A(d) was not time-barred.  [S. 148A(b), 148A(d), 149(1),  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-59469","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-ftb","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59469","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=59469"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59469\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":59470,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/59469\/revisions\/59470"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=59469"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=59469"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=59469"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}