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 1, Cited by 2]

Gujarat High Court

Swati Saurin Shah vs Income Tax Officer - Ward - 5 (2) (4) Or His on 11 January, 2016

Author: Akil Kureshi

Bench: Akil Kureshi, Mohinder Pal

                   C/SCA/201/2016                                            ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD


                      SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 201 of 2016

         ==========================================================
                           SWATI SAURIN SHAH....Petitioner(s)
                                       Versus
                      INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD - 5 (2) (4) OR HIS
                             SUCCESSOR....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR SN DIVATIA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1



                  CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
                         and
                         HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL



                                    Date : 11/01/2016
                                      ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

1. The petitioner has challenged notice for re-opening of an assessment which was previously framed after scrutiny. The reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer for issuing the impugned notice pertained to the valuation of the land in question as on 01.04.1981, which, according to the Assessing Officer, in case of co-owner, was found inaccurate. The second reason pertains to the deduction claimed by the assessee under Section 54EC of the Income Tax Act,1961, which, according to the Assessing Officer, could not exceed Rs. 50 lacs.

Page 1 of 2

HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Tue Jan 12 02:36:27 IST 2016 C/SCA/201/2016 ORDER

2. Besides others, the main contention of the petitioner is that, both these issues were examined by the Assessing Officer in the original assessment. Any addition now would merely be on a change of opinion.

3. Notice returnable on 08.02.2016. Direct Service is permitted.

The respondent may proceed with the assessment, final order shall not be passed without the leave of the Court.

(AKIL KURESHI, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) Jyoti Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Tue Jan 12 02:36:27 IST 2016