<?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>2018 (2) TMI 675 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355254</link>
    <description>The Gujarat High Court dismissed the Tax Appeals, affirming the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the notice for reopening the assessee&#039;s assessment for the assessment year 2005-06 lacked validity. The Tribunal found the reasons for reopening, based on unaccounted sales leading to under-assessment of income, did not conclusively establish tax evasion. The Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation that the reasons did not align with the Director&#039;s statement, which indicated unauthorized movement of goods but did not negate the actual sale of goods by the assessee. The judgment highlighted the necessity of a clear link between reasons for reopening and supporting evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 675 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355254</link>
      <description>The Gujarat High Court dismissed the Tax Appeals, affirming the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s decision that the notice for reopening the assessee&#039;s assessment for the assessment year 2005-06 lacked validity. The Tribunal found the reasons for reopening, based on unaccounted sales leading to under-assessment of income, did not conclusively establish tax evasion. The Court agreed with the Tribunal&#039;s interpretation that the reasons did not align with the Director&#039;s statement, which indicated unauthorized movement of goods but did not negate the actual sale of goods by the assessee. The judgment highlighted the necessity of a clear link between reasons for reopening and supporting evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355254</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>