<?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>2010 (9) TMI 1111 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179624</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to redo assessments in cases involving joint search warrants and individual assessment orders. It ruled that when a warrant is issued in joint names, the assessment should also be made collectively in the names of both individuals. The Court emphasized the need for individual authorization for assessments. It held that discrepancies between the warrant and assessment render proceedings illegal, allowing the assessee to challenge the order even if the objection was not raised earlier. The Court rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals, finding no substantial legal question for consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2023 17:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 1111 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179624</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision to redo assessments in cases involving joint search warrants and individual assessment orders. It ruled that when a warrant is issued in joint names, the assessment should also be made collectively in the names of both individuals. The Court emphasized the need for individual authorization for assessments. It held that discrepancies between the warrant and assessment render proceedings illegal, allowing the assessee to challenge the order even if the objection was not raised earlier. The Court rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals, finding no substantial legal question for consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>