{"id":65507,"date":"2026-11-09T10:48:08","date_gmt":"2026-11-09T05:18:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/oxford-university-press-v-dy-cit-2025-171-taxmann-com-655-2026-488-itr-172-bomhc\/"},"modified":"2026-11-09T10:48:08","modified_gmt":"2026-11-09T05:18:08","slug":"oxford-university-press-v-dy-cit-2025-171-taxmann-com-655-2026-488-itr-172-bomhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/oxford-university-press-v-dy-cit-2025-171-taxmann-com-655-2026-488-itr-172-bomhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Oxford University Press v.Dy. CIT [2025] 171 taxmann.com 655 \/ (2026) 488 ITR 172 (Bom)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee-company was engaged in the business of publishing and trading of books.It filed its return declaring total income in the status of a domestic company. Assessment was completed in the status of a domestic company. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer sought to reopen assessment on the ground that in scrutiny proceedings of assessment year 2016-17, based on the tax residency certificate submitted, the assessee was assessed as a non-resident and income was taxed at 40 per cent i.e., the foreign company rate; hence, assessee should have been taxed at the rate applicable to a foreign company. On writ, the Court held that there was no allegation regarding any failure on the assessee&#8217;s part to fully and truly disclose any material facts necessary for assessment. Accordingly, the reassessment notice and order disposing of the objection were quashed and set aside. (AY. 2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Non-resident-Alleged short levy of tax-Merely because there is some change in the tax rate for the future assessment years, the reassessment notice was not valid-No failure to disclose material facts-Notice and order disposing of the objection was quashed.[S. 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_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65507","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-h2z","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65507","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=65507"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65507\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":65508,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65507\/revisions\/65508"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65507"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65507"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65507"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}