<?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>1997 (4) TMI 32 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16690</link>
    <description>A reassessment under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act requires the competent authority to record reasons before initiating action on the basis of a belief that property has escaped assessment. Those recorded reasons, however, need not be communicated with the notice at the pre-notice stage, because the proceeding remains administrative until the accountable person responds. Disclosure may be sought later, and the notice can be challenged if no reasons were recorded or if the reasons are irrelevant. On the stated facts, refusal to furnish reasons immediately did not vitiate the notice, and the reopening was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:01:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=55690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 32 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16690</link>
      <description>A reassessment under section 59 of the Estate Duty Act requires the competent authority to record reasons before initiating action on the basis of a belief that property has escaped assessment. Those recorded reasons, however, need not be communicated with the notice at the pre-notice stage, because the proceeding remains administrative until the accountable person responds. Disclosure may be sought later, and the notice can be challenged if no reasons were recorded or if the reasons are irrelevant. On the stated facts, refusal to furnish reasons immediately did not vitiate the notice, and the reopening was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>