Bombay High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 23 - December 29, 2024
Live LawCitations: 2024 LiveLaw 650 to 2024 LiveLaw 654 Nominal Index: Zahid Khamisa vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr, 2024 LiveLaw 650 Imperial Consultants and Securities vs. Deputy CIT, 2024 LiveLaw 651 Shri Saibaba Sansthan Trust vs. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw 652 Nav Chetna Charitable Trust vs, CIT, 2024 LiveLaw 653 Chandrabhan Atulkar v. MOIL Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw 654 Judgments/Final Orders: Bombay High Court Allows Mahim Dargah Mela To Continue, Quashes Police Notice To Stop Event Due To Christmas Celebrations Case title: Zahid Khamisa vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 650 The Bombay High Court on Tuesday quashed a notice issued by Mumbai Police to stop the annual Mahim Mela –one of the city's most vibrant events–citing the "overcrowding" on the streets, especially on December 24 and 25, when people will usher in Christmas celebrations. ITO Acted On Complete Change Of Opinion On Same Material With Intent To Review Assessment Order Passed By Him: Bombay HC Quashes Reopening Case Title: Imperial Consultants and Securities vs. Deputy CIT Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 651 While setting aside the reassessment proceedings, the Bombay High Court held that 'change of opinion' or 'review of already completed assessment', is not permitted to AO. S.147 Of IT Act Doesn't Postulate Review Jurisdiction Such That Assessment Can Be Reviewed By AO Intending To Form Different Opinion: Bombay HC Case Title: Shri Saibaba Sansthan Trust vs. Union of India Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 652 The Bombay High Court ruled that the materials which were already available before AO and which ultimately were considered in passing assessment order u/s 143, cannot form basis of reopening, on ground that such materials were ignored in finalizing assessment. Belated Filing Of Form 9A Is Not Attributable To Trust: Bombay HC Allows Exemption U/S 11 After Condoning Delay Under IT Act Case Title: Nav Chetna Charitable Trust vs, CIT Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 653 The Bombay High Court held that bonafide delay in filing Form 9A on part of trust, has to be construed as procedural lapse and shall be condoned by exercising powers u/s 119 of Income tax Act.