<?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>2011 (1) TMI 432 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205011</link>
    <description>The court held that the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking to reopen the assessment for the year 2004-05 was not sustainable as there was no failure to disclose material facts. The court found that the issue of bad debt deduction had been addressed during the original assessment, and no new material facts were disclosed in the subsequent notice. Therefore, the petition was allowed, and the notice dated March 22, 2010 was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178536" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 432 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205011</link>
      <description>The court held that the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking to reopen the assessment for the year 2004-05 was not sustainable as there was no failure to disclose material facts. The court found that the issue of bad debt deduction had been addressed during the original assessment, and no new material facts were disclosed in the subsequent notice. Therefore, the petition was allowed, and the notice dated March 22, 2010 was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205011</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>