9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and S. K. Nayak for the petitioner. Dr. C. R. Mishra , Senior Standing Counsel, for the respondent. JUDGMENT By means of these writ petitions, the petitioner has challenged the assessment orders dated June 30, 2003 for the assessment years 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 passed in the proceedings which were initiated on the notices for reassessment issued under section 12(8) of the Ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the period of limitation for passing the reassessment order or disposing of the case would be one year. The assessment order having been passed on June 30, 2003, which was beyond the said period of one year, the impugned assessment orders dated June 30, 2003 are liable to be quashed. 4. Per contra, Dr. C. R. Mishra, learned counsel for the Revenue has submitted that section 12(8) of the Act does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ituted thereafter shall be disposed of within two years from the date of such institution." 7. As per the above sub-rule (3), the limitation for disposal of the case where the notices had been issued after the coming into force of the said sub-rule (3), would be two years, but in case the proceeding had been initiated prior to the coming into force of the said sub-rule (3), which was on July 21, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2001. In the present cases, the assessment orders having been passed beyond the period of limitation, the said orders dated June 30, 2003, which were passed beyond the period of one year, would thus be without jurisdiction, and liable to be quashed. 10. Accordingly, the writ petitions stand allowed and the assessment orders dated June 30, 2003 for the assessment years 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
