<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (7) TMI 450 - ITAT DELHI-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64871</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 1995-96 to be invalid and without jurisdiction due to being barred by limitation under s. 150(2) of the IT Act. As a result, the reassessment was quashed. The Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the addition since the reassessment was deemed invalid. Consequently, the appeal by the assessee was partly allowed, leading to the cancellation/quashing of the reassessment framed under sections 148/143(3).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:32:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=103311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 450 - ITAT DELHI-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64871</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found the reopening of the assessment for the assessment year 1995-96 to be invalid and without jurisdiction due to being barred by limitation under s. 150(2) of the IT Act. As a result, the reassessment was quashed. The Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the addition since the reassessment was deemed invalid. Consequently, the appeal by the assessee was partly allowed, leading to the cancellation/quashing of the reassessment framed under sections 148/143(3).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64871</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>