<?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>2012 (7) TMI 543 - Allahabad High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215043</link>
    <description>HC held that s.292BB is a rule of evidence and a deeming provision that can validate service in certain circumstances but does not negate the jurisdictional necessity of issuing a notice under s.143(2). Relying on the SC precedent that jurisdiction of the AO rests on issuance of the s.143(2) notice, the court found the notice was not issued here, the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction, and the income-tax appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2025 16:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 543 - Allahabad High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215043</link>
      <description>HC held that s.292BB is a rule of evidence and a deeming provision that can validate service in certain circumstances but does not negate the jurisdictional necessity of issuing a notice under s.143(2). Relying on the SC precedent that jurisdiction of the AO rests on issuance of the s.143(2) notice, the court found the notice was not issued here, the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction, and the income-tax appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215043</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>