<?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>2007 (5) TMI 349 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119414</link>
    <description>The tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings as invalid, ruling that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts. Consequently, the tribunal did not delve into the merits of the disallowed commission paid to M/s. Hallmark Health Care Ltd. or the charging of interest under Section 234D. The appeal by the assessee was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 18:43:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 349 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119414</link>
      <description>The tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings as invalid, ruling that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose all material facts. Consequently, the tribunal did not delve into the merits of the disallowed commission paid to M/s. Hallmark Health Care Ltd. or the charging of interest under Section 234D. The appeal by the assessee was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119414</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>