<?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>1964 (7) TMI 43 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180834</link>
    <description>A notice under section 33B was held sufficient where it disclosed the essential grounds for revision, including want of proper enquiry, doubtful residence and business, and erroneous assessments. The Commissioner was entitled to conduct enquiries for revision and rely on the results as supporting material for grounds already disclosed. Because the order was not founded solely on undisclosed basic material, and the assessee&#039;s own reply and the record independently supported the disclosed grounds, the use of some material gathered behind the assessee&#039;s back did not breach natural justice. The revisional order was therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2016 14:19:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (7) TMI 43 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180834</link>
      <description>A notice under section 33B was held sufficient where it disclosed the essential grounds for revision, including want of proper enquiry, doubtful residence and business, and erroneous assessments. The Commissioner was entitled to conduct enquiries for revision and rely on the results as supporting material for grounds already disclosed. Because the order was not founded solely on undisclosed basic material, and the assessee&#039;s own reply and the record independently supported the disclosed grounds, the use of some material gathered behind the assessee&#039;s back did not breach natural justice. The revisional order was therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180834</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>