<?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>2009 (3) TMI 506 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77128</link>
    <description>The court found the impugned notice dated August 31, 2007, invalid due to various reasons including incorrect status designation, lack of proper satisfaction recording, improper reliance on another officer&#039;s satisfaction, unjustified request for a fresh return, illegitimate transfer of jurisdiction, and improper assumption of jurisdiction. Consequently, the notice and related actions were set aside and quashed, with the writ petition being allowed and no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115302" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 506 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77128</link>
      <description>The court found the impugned notice dated August 31, 2007, invalid due to various reasons including incorrect status designation, lack of proper satisfaction recording, improper reliance on another officer&#039;s satisfaction, unjustified request for a fresh return, illegitimate transfer of jurisdiction, and improper assumption of jurisdiction. Consequently, the notice and related actions were set aside and quashed, with the writ petition being allowed and no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>