Assessee had received a notice us 148A(1), to explain the source of investment in FDs. We had replied to that notice before due date , it's not a new deposits deposits but a renewal of old deposits. Also relevant documents were enclosed to that notice. There after AO passed an order us 148A(3) , that no replied filed till date to notice us 148A(1) & issued a notice us 148. Now we filed a return us 148 & in assessment proceedings we also argued that order us 148A(3) is invalid. Also I had a jurisdictional high court that is Bombay High court writ petition order where it clearly says that such orders us 148A(3) is invalid. Now in my case it's obligatory for AO has to follow Bombay High court order or not ?
Menu
Assessmet Procedure us 147
Replies (1)
Yes, the Assessing Officer is legally and mandatorily bound to follow the Bombay High Court judgment, being the jurisdictional High Court. An order u/s 148A(d) passed by wrongly stating “no reply filed” despite a timely reply is invalid in law, and consequently the notice u/s 148 and entire reassessment proceedings are void ab initio. Participation in proceedings does not cure this defect. The most effective remedy is to file a writ petition before the Bombay High Court for quashing the reassessment.
Recent Topic
- Section 192 2(b) entry in IT return ITR 1
- Rent from redevelopment property
- How to find FMV of inherited gold after selling it
- Happy CA Day!!
- Share your proudest CA moment 🏆
- Gift recd from brother
- How to show Loan write off in DPT 3?
- Form 10E and Salary arrear
- LTCG U/S 54F. Sale of property plus sale of share
- Issue with ITR2 online utility for HUF
Related Topics
CAclubindia
