<?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 (9) TMI 1195 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332934</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the reopening of assessment for the assessment year 2008-2009. The court found that the petitioner failed to fully disclose material facts regarding the sale of agricultural land and the distance from municipal limits. The court considered the new evidence provided by the Assessing Officer and allowed the reassessment to proceed. The court emphasized that assessments should be based on evidence without being influenced by court observations, vacating interim relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 May 2017 12:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 1195 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332934</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the reopening of assessment for the assessment year 2008-2009. The court found that the petitioner failed to fully disclose material facts regarding the sale of agricultural land and the distance from municipal limits. The court considered the new evidence provided by the Assessing Officer and allowed the reassessment to proceed. The court emphasized that assessments should be based on evidence without being influenced by court observations, vacating interim relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>