W.T.AS. NOS. 687/LB TO 691/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 1ST OCTOBER, 2005. versus W.T.AS. NOS. 687/LB TO 691/LB OF 2004, DECIDED ON 1ST OCTOBER, 2005.
Section 17 Assessment of Avoidance Assessment On the one hand, the appellate authority had earlier issued a joint notice issued under section 17 of the Well Tax Act, 1963, notice of illegality issued under section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1963. There was a joint notice for all the assessment years. The First Appellate Authority acknowledged such a fact, and the First Appellate Authority obtained a remand for the diagnosis of de novo instead of canceling the assessment based on the joint notice. The appellate tribunal erred in law while seeking remand of the case and the appellate tribunal vacated the order of the First Appellate Authority and the assessment of the Assessing Officer, which was to be completed within two years from the date of issue of the notice. In fact, almost four years after the issuance of notices and such specialists, assessments were made, after which the jurisdiction of the jurisdiction by the Assisting Officer was obstructed by the law.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
