<?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 (9) TMI 270 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251244</link>
    <description>The court upheld the reopening notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the claim for bad debts, finding the PetitionerBank failed to fully disclose material facts. However, the court set aside the reopening notice regarding the claim for depreciation on leased equipment, deeming it a mere change of opinion. The petition was partly allowed, with no costs ordered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:53:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 270 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251244</link>
      <description>The court upheld the reopening notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, regarding the claim for bad debts, finding the PetitionerBank failed to fully disclose material facts. However, the court set aside the reopening notice regarding the claim for depreciation on leased equipment, deeming it a mere change of opinion. The petition was partly allowed, with no costs ordered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>