Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Sai Enterprice Versus Union of India & 4

2017 (9) TMI 837 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT

Application for issuing notification under section 80IA( 4)(iii) rejected - documents accompanied by the representation of the petitioner not taken into account before rejection of the application - Held that:- The documents accompanied by the representation of the petitioner dated 21.4.2014 were not taken into account before rejection of the application of the petitioner. The petitioner has not been able to produce any conclusive proof of the service of the said communication dated 21.4.2014 to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nclusively that such documents were inwarded before the authority before the final order of rejection was passed, would be just too harsh. - Under the circumstances, impugned order dated 13.5.2014 is set aside. The authority shall pass fresh order after considering the additional documents accompanying the petitioner's representation dated 21.4.2014 made in response to the summons dated 16.4.2014 - Special Civil Application No. 18098 of 2016 - Dated:- 11-9-2017 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. AKI .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

facts minutely. 2. Briefly stated, case of the petitioner is that the petitioner having developed an industrial park before 31.3.2011, was eligible for deduction under section 80IA( 4) of the Act for which notification by the competent authority was essential. The petitioner applied for such purpose on 22.1.2009. The competent authority entered into detail correspondence with the petitioner and ultimately rejected the application by impugned order dated 13.5.2014. The petitioner applied for revi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ority on 25.2.2014 and 16.4.2014, it was recorded that no response came from the petitioner and, therefore, the authority proceeded on the basis of available material on record. Case of the petitioner is that though there was no response to the first notice dated 25.2.2014, in response to the second notice dated 16.4.2014, the petitioner had made a detailed representation under the communication dated 21.4.2014 along with which several documents were produced. These documents if taken into accou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version