<?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>2002 (9) TMI 84 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12231</link>
    <description>Withdrawal of investment allowance under sections 154 and 155(4A) of the Income-tax Act could not be sustained where the assessee was given only one day to reply to the show-cause notice. The short notice period was held inadequate for an effective response, and the rectification order was interfered with for denial of proper hearing. The withdrawal was quashed and the matter remitted for reconsideration after giving the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=51243" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (9) TMI 84 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12231</link>
      <description>Withdrawal of investment allowance under sections 154 and 155(4A) of the Income-tax Act could not be sustained where the assessee was given only one day to reply to the show-cause notice. The short notice period was held inadequate for an effective response, and the rectification order was interfered with for denial of proper hearing. The withdrawal was quashed and the matter remitted for reconsideration after giving the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>