<?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>2006 (12) TMI 498 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175589</link>
    <description>The Court quashed the warrant of authorization issued under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act as it was deemed to lack jurisdiction. The Court emphasized the necessity for concrete reasons to believe that income was undisclosed before initiating search and seizure actions. Since the information provided by the Customs Officer was insufficient to establish undisclosed income, the Court directed the respondents to refund the seized amount to the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406773" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 498 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175589</link>
      <description>The Court quashed the warrant of authorization issued under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act as it was deemed to lack jurisdiction. The Court emphasized the necessity for concrete reasons to believe that income was undisclosed before initiating search and seizure actions. Since the information provided by the Customs Officer was insufficient to establish undisclosed income, the Court directed the respondents to refund the seized amount to the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175589</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>