<?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>2016 (2) TMI 801 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272096</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petitions, quashing the impugned orders for reassessment. The judgment emphasized the importance of addressing audit objections and considering all relevant facts during the assessment process to avoid unwarranted reassessment proceedings. The decision was influenced by the assessing officer&#039;s response to the audit objection and the petitioner&#039;s contentions regarding the assessment process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2016 11:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417665" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 801 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272096</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petitions, quashing the impugned orders for reassessment. The judgment emphasized the importance of addressing audit objections and considering all relevant facts during the assessment process to avoid unwarranted reassessment proceedings. The decision was influenced by the assessing officer&#039;s response to the audit objection and the petitioner&#039;s contentions regarding the assessment process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>