<?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>2010 (6) TMI 646 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123030</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the first notice served by affixture was invalid, and the second notice served beyond the 12-month period was also invalid under section 143(2) of the Act. Consequently, the assessment was annulled, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the assessment without addressing the other grounds raised by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2012 10:39:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160002" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 646 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123030</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the first notice served by affixture was invalid, and the second notice served beyond the 12-month period was also invalid under section 143(2) of the Act. Consequently, the assessment was annulled, and the appeal was allowed, setting aside the assessment without addressing the other grounds raised by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>