<?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>2014 (7) TMI 220 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249183</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the assessment order was invalid due to improper service of notice under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act. The Court found that the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction to frame the assessment as the second notice was sent beyond the limitation period without acknowledgment of service for the first notice. Both the assessee and the revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, confirming that the notice was time-barred, and the assessment was deemed invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2014 18:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=358951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 220 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249183</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the assessment order was invalid due to improper service of notice under Section 143 of the Income Tax Act. The Court found that the assessing authority lacked jurisdiction to frame the assessment as the second notice was sent beyond the limitation period without acknowledgment of service for the first notice. Both the assessee and the revenue&#039;s appeals were dismissed, confirming that the notice was time-barred, and the assessment was deemed invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>