Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Patel Alloy Steel (P) Limited vs Asst.Commissioner Of Income on 18 March, 2013

Author: Akil Kureshi

Bench: Akil Kureshi

  
	 
	 PATEL ALLOY STEEL (P) LIMITED....Petitioner(s)V/SASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) CIRCLE 5 AHMEDABAD....Respondent(s)
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 


	C/SCA/3047/2013
	                                                                    
	                           ORDER

 

 


 
	  
	  
		 
			 

IN
			THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
		
	

 


 


 


SPECIAL CIVIL
APPLICATION  NO. 3047 of 2013
 


 


 

================================================================
 


PATEL ALLOY STEEL (P)
LIMITED....Petitioner(s)
 


Versus
 


ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME
TAX (OSD) CIRCLE 5 AHMEDABAD....Respondent(s)
 

================================================================
 

Appearance:
 

MR
SN SOPARKAR, SR. ADV WITH MR B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the
Petitioner(s) No. 1
 

================================================================
 

 


 


	 
		  
		 
		  
			 
				 

CORAM:
				
				
			
			 
				 

HONOURABLE
				MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
			
		
		 
			 
				 

 

				
			
			 
				 

and
			
		
		 
			 
				 

 

				
			
			 
				 

HONOURABLE MS
				JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI
			
		
	

 


 

 


Date : 18/03/2013
 


 

 


ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Petitioner has challenged the notice for reopening of assessment which was previously framed after scrutiny. Such notice has been issued beyond the period of four years from the end of relevant assessment year. On the basis of reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the Assessing Officer has listed four different reasons with respect to each of them, he has stated that on verification of details .... under-assessment is noticed. He has, therefore, submitted that there was no failure on the part of the petitioner to disclose truly and full all material facts. He further submitted that some of the claims were in fact scrutinized during the original assessment. He further stated that the notice has been issued at the instance of the audit party.

Notice returnable on 8th April 2013. Respondents may continue with the assessment, final order pursuant to the impugned notice shall not be passed without the leave of the Court.

Direct service is permitted.

(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MS SONIA GOKANI, J.) (vjn) Page 2 of 2