Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2 & Ors v. Dr. D.y. Chandrachud, J
High Court
23 Dec 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newas
Parties
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2 & Ors v. Dr. D.y. Chandrachud, J
Date of order
23 Dec 2011
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2 & Ors v. Dr. D.y. Chandrachud, J, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Decision: The Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
JPP
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYAPPELLATE SICE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11057 OF 2011
Sound Casting Pvt. Ltd.
... Petitioner.
V/s.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2 & Ors. ... Respondents.
Mr. K. Gopal i/b. Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Petitioner.Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Respondents.
P.C. :-
CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD & A.A. SAYED, JJ. 23 DECEMBER 2011.
In response to a notice issued to the Petitioner under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1981, on 9 March 2011 and the reasons disclosed under a letter dated 7 December 2011, the Petitioner submitted objections for reopening of the assessment on 12 December 2011. In terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer[1], we direct the Assessing Officer to dispose of the objections by a reasoned order within a period of four weeks from today. Until then, no steps shall be taken in pursuance of the notice dated 7 March 2011 and in the event that an adverse order is passed, for a further period of four weeks thereafter. The Petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.)
(A.A. Sayed, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.