<?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 (3) TMI 39 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339536</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the transfer of jurisdiction from Kolkata to Deoghar under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court found the transfer valid based on a survey suggesting centralization of the case in Deoghar, where the petitioner&#039;s principal place of business was located. The reasons for the transfer provided in the show-cause notices were deemed adequate, and the court held that the principles of natural justice were not violated as the petitioner was informed and given an opportunity to object. The court upheld the impugned order, emphasizing it would not substitute its decision for that of the authorities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 18:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460029" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 39 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339536</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition challenging the transfer of jurisdiction from Kolkata to Deoghar under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court found the transfer valid based on a survey suggesting centralization of the case in Deoghar, where the petitioner&#039;s principal place of business was located. The reasons for the transfer provided in the show-cause notices were deemed adequate, and the court held that the principles of natural justice were not violated as the petitioner was informed and given an opportunity to object. The court upheld the impugned order, emphasizing it would not substitute its decision for that of the authorities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339536</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>