<?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 (9) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT,  RAJASTHAN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2875</link>
    <description>The Court held that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue a notice for reassessment in 1991 as it was beyond the limitation period and no default could be attributed to the petitioner. The Court emphasized the duty of the assessee to disclose all relevant facts for assessment. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the notice was quashed, and the respondents were restrained from further proceedings, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42228" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 87 - HIGH COURT,  RAJASTHAN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2875</link>
      <description>The Court held that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to issue a notice for reassessment in 1991 as it was beyond the limitation period and no default could be attributed to the petitioner. The Court emphasized the duty of the assessee to disclose all relevant facts for assessment. Consequently, the petition was allowed, the notice was quashed, and the respondents were restrained from further proceedings, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2875</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>