<?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 (6) TMI 201 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328492</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment in this case was not valid as it was done beyond the four-year limit without any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. Consequently, the consequential additions were unsustainable, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed, setting aside the reopening of assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 11:32:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430682" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 201 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328492</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the reopening of assessment in this case was not valid as it was done beyond the four-year limit without any failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts. Consequently, the consequential additions were unsustainable, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed, setting aside the reopening of assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328492</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>