<?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 (4) TMI 727 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341757</link>
    <description>The court set aside the reassessment order due to failure to dispose of objections as required by law and the use of a different ground than the one in the notice. The court entertained the writ petition despite an alternative remedy being available, citing lack of jurisdiction and breach of natural justice. The parties were left to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Aug 2017 10:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466060" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 727 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341757</link>
      <description>The court set aside the reassessment order due to failure to dispose of objections as required by law and the use of a different ground than the one in the notice. The court entertained the writ petition despite an alternative remedy being available, citing lack of jurisdiction and breach of natural justice. The parties were left to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341757</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>