Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.60 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Dayanidhi Maran vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 10 October, 2018
7.The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
reasons for rejecting the objection vide communication dated 24.12.2019
was merely based on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Dayanidhi Maran vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in
W.P.Nos.3405 and 43944 of 2016 vide order dated 10.10.2018. It is
5/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.1604 & 1606 of 2020
further submitted that the entire procedure followed by the respondent
while passing the impugned assessment order was irregular and contrary to
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts
(India) Ltd reported in 259 ITR 119 (SC) and also without considering the
objection as to why the assessment cannot be revised in terms of the
reasons given for reopening the assessment. The learned counsel for the
petitioners therefore submits that the impugned orders are liable to be
quashed.
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 139 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 129 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1