<?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 (4) TMI 139 - Delhi High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221943</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2000-01 and the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s authority to reopen the assessment based on the petitioner&#039;s failure to include income from Infrastructure Utilization Fund and interest in the total income. The court emphasized that fulfilling the requirements of section 147 empowers the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings, even without prior steps under section 143(3). The petitioner was allowed to present explanations based on changed circumstances but the court did not express any opinion on the merits and did not award costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2013 21:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 139 - Delhi High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221943</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2000-01 and the notice under section 142(1) of the Act. The court upheld the Assessing Officer&#039;s authority to reopen the assessment based on the petitioner&#039;s failure to include income from Infrastructure Utilization Fund and interest in the total income. The court emphasized that fulfilling the requirements of section 147 empowers the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings, even without prior steps under section 143(3). The petitioner was allowed to present explanations based on changed circumstances but the court did not express any opinion on the merits and did not award costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>