<?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>2007 (6) TMI 145 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3186</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the tax case, ruling that the reassessment beyond four years from the relevant assessment year was time-barred. The court emphasized the necessity of proving failure to disclose material facts by the assessee for reassessment under Section 147, highlighting the importance of adhering to established legal principles and the dynamic nature of law. The judgment upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, stating no substantial question of law arose for consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jul 2008 19:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42538" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (6) TMI 145 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3186</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the tax case, ruling that the reassessment beyond four years from the relevant assessment year was time-barred. The court emphasized the necessity of proving failure to disclose material facts by the assessee for reassessment under Section 147, highlighting the importance of adhering to established legal principles and the dynamic nature of law. The judgment upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision, stating no substantial question of law arose for consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3186</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>