DR. SHRIKANT M. GOSAVI. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2) NASIK.

PDF · subscribers
WP/2742/1994HC BombayHCBM01021619199408 August 2005Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN,HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE J.H. BHATIA2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The Bombay High Court disposed of the Writ Petition on the basis of the submissions made by both parties. The Petitioner undertook to file their objections concerning the proposed re-opening of assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act within four weeks. In response, the Revenue assured that upon receipt of these objections within the stipulated timeframe, the concerned Income Tax Officer would pass a reasoned order within twelve weeks thereafter. No specific findings on the merits of the proposed re-opening or the objections were made, as the court's order was based on the agreed terms between the Petitioner and the Revenue. The issue of whether the assessment would ultimately be re-opened was left to be decided by the Assessing Officer after considering the Petitioner's objections.

What were the facts?

The Petitioner, Dr. Shrikant M. Gosavi, filed a Writ Petition No. 2742 of 1994 before the Bombay High Court. The petition was filed against the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Nashik, and others. The core of the matter concerned the proposed re-opening of the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment years are not specified in the provided text. The procedural history involves the Petitioner's intention to submit objections regarding the proposed re-opening of assessment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Petitioner has a right to submit objections against the proposed re-opening of assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, and if so, what is the timeline for submission? Assessee's Contention: The Petitioner's counsel stated that the Petitioner will submit their objections with regard to the proposed re-opening of the assessment under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act within a period of 4 weeks. Revenue's Contention: The Respondent's counsel stated that if such objections are filed within a period of 4 weeks, the concerned officer will pass a reasoned order within a period of 12 weeks thereafter.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2742 OF 1994 WRIT PETITION NO.2742 OF 1994 WRIT PETITION NO.2742 OF 1994 Dr. Shrikant M. Gosavi ...Petitioner. V/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Nashik and Others ...Respondents. Mr.Atul Jasani with Mr.Pramod Vaidya for the Petitioner. Dr.P.Daniel for the Respondent. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 8th August, 2005. DATE : 8th August, 2005. DATE : 8th August, 2005. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondents. 2. The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that within a period of 4 weeks, the Petitioner will submit their objections with regard to the proposed re-opening of the assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. 3. Dr.Daniel for the Respondent states that if such objections are filed within a period of 4 weeks, the concerned officer will pass a reasoned order within a period of 12 weeks thereafter.

: 2 : 4. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. 5. Issue certified copy. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.)

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →