<?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>1974 (12) TMI 72 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169460</link>
    <description>The court held that the Income-tax Officer received valid &quot;information&quot; within the meaning of Section 147(b) after the assessment, justifying the issuance of the notice under Section 148. The court refused relief sought by the petitioner based on the petitioner&#039;s misleading conduct, lack of suffered injustice, and the potential resulting injustice from granting relief. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition with costs and upheld the validity of the notice issued under the Income-tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2015 14:12:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=382526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1974 (12) TMI 72 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169460</link>
      <description>The court held that the Income-tax Officer received valid &quot;information&quot; within the meaning of Section 147(b) after the assessment, justifying the issuance of the notice under Section 148. The court refused relief sought by the petitioner based on the petitioner&#039;s misleading conduct, lack of suffered injustice, and the potential resulting injustice from granting relief. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition with costs and upheld the validity of the notice issued under the Income-tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Dec 1974 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>