<?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>2006 (3) TMI 112 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13236</link>
    <description>HC allowed the writ, holding the CIT&#039;s revision order under s.263 legally defective for failing to consider the assessee&#039;s detailed written explanations and for not recording reasons why the original assessment was still deemed erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The November 1, 1996 order setting aside the assessment and directing a fresh assessment was set aside as impermissible in law. The impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 14:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=52246" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 112 - GAUHATI High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13236</link>
      <description>HC allowed the writ, holding the CIT&#039;s revision order under s.263 legally defective for failing to consider the assessee&#039;s detailed written explanations and for not recording reasons why the original assessment was still deemed erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. The November 1, 1996 order setting aside the assessment and directing a fresh assessment was set aside as impermissible in law. The impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>