<?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>2011 (11) TMI 812 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274458</link>
    <description>Service of notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act is examined in relation to the address used for dispatch, where the department relied on an address obtained from the bank rather than the address shown in the return. The note also addresses whether reassessment proceedings can continue without proper service in accordance with Section 282. The recorded outcome is that notice was issued and operation of the impugned order was stayed until further orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2018 17:48:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 812 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274458</link>
      <description>Service of notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act is examined in relation to the address used for dispatch, where the department relied on an address obtained from the bank rather than the address shown in the return. The note also addresses whether reassessment proceedings can continue without proper service in accordance with Section 282. The recorded outcome is that notice was issued and operation of the impugned order was stayed until further orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274458</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>