<?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>1998 (12) TMI 22 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14352</link>
    <description>The court held that the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for reassessment for the assessment year 1989-90 against the petitioner, a non-resident partner in certain firms, was illegal and lacked jurisdiction. The court emphasized that the income of the petitioner through the firms is assessable from the firms, not personally from the petitioner. Therefore, the writ of prohibition sought by the petitioner against the reassessment was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 13:25:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=53352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (12) TMI 22 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14352</link>
      <description>The court held that the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for reassessment for the assessment year 1989-90 against the petitioner, a non-resident partner in certain firms, was illegal and lacked jurisdiction. The court emphasized that the income of the petitioner through the firms is assessable from the firms, not personally from the petitioner. Therefore, the writ of prohibition sought by the petitioner against the reassessment was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>