<?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>2013 (3) TMI 562 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221796</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision to reopen assessments for A.Ys. 2006-07 and 2007-08 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer&#039;s opinion was deemed justified as the assessee failed to substantiate differences in circumstances between relevant years. The court found the reopening lawful, noting the lack of material details provided by the assessee and the Assessing Officer&#039;s reliance on previous decisions. The petition challenging the notices was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:05:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 562 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221796</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s decision to reopen assessments for A.Ys. 2006-07 and 2007-08 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer&#039;s opinion was deemed justified as the assessee failed to substantiate differences in circumstances between relevant years. The court found the reopening lawful, noting the lack of material details provided by the assessee and the Assessing Officer&#039;s reliance on previous decisions. The petition challenging the notices was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>