<?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>1968 (2) TMI 3 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7154</link>
    <description>Reassessment under the statutory omission ground requires proof that the assessee omitted or failed to disclose primary facts necessary for assessment; here the assessee had disclosed the primary facts that rents were not received because properties were requisitioned and compensation fixation proceedings were pending, and the assessing officer made an estimate without further inquiry. Speculative references to correspondence or missing evidential particulars (area, municipal assessments, hypothetical prior rents, hutment dimensions) do not establish nondisclosure of primary facts. Therefore the statutory prerequisites for reassessment were not met and reassessment is unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 18:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=46206" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (2) TMI 3 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7154</link>
      <description>Reassessment under the statutory omission ground requires proof that the assessee omitted or failed to disclose primary facts necessary for assessment; here the assessee had disclosed the primary facts that rents were not received because properties were requisitioned and compensation fixation proceedings were pending, and the assessing officer made an estimate without further inquiry. Speculative references to correspondence or missing evidential particulars (area, municipal assessments, hypothetical prior rents, hutment dimensions) do not establish nondisclosure of primary facts. Therefore the statutory prerequisites for reassessment were not met and reassessment is unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=7154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>