<?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>2003 (12) TMI 47 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11385</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the Commissioner has jurisdiction to revise an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, using powers under Section 263. The intimation is deemed an order due to its legal fiction as a notice of demand under Section 156, falling within the scope of Section 263. The Court clarified that the intimation is an assessment and can be revised if erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The case was remitted to the Tribunal for further consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=50401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 47 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11385</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the Commissioner has jurisdiction to revise an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, using powers under Section 263. The intimation is deemed an order due to its legal fiction as a notice of demand under Section 156, falling within the scope of Section 263. The Court clarified that the intimation is an assessment and can be revised if erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The case was remitted to the Tribunal for further consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11385</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>