<?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>2017 (1) TMI 1201 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338121</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioner must follow the procedure outlined by the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd vs. ITO. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit objections to the reasons for reopening within three weeks, and the Assessing Officer was directed to decide on the objections on merits and in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Jan 2017 13:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=456377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 1201 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338121</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the petitioner must follow the procedure outlined by the Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd vs. ITO. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit objections to the reasons for reopening within three weeks, and the Assessing Officer was directed to decide on the objections on merits and in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338121</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>