<?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 (11) TMI 83 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17063</link>
    <description>The Court held that the notification transferring assessment files from the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent was unsustainable due to procedural deficiencies. The 4th respondent was directed to reconsider petitioner&#039;s objections, ensuring a fair process with a personal hearing within two months. Further proceedings on the transfer were stayed pending the decision on objections. The judgment emphasized procedural fairness without delving into the case&#039;s merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:15:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=56063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (11) TMI 83 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17063</link>
      <description>The Court held that the notification transferring assessment files from the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent was unsustainable due to procedural deficiencies. The 4th respondent was directed to reconsider petitioner&#039;s objections, ensuring a fair process with a personal hearing within two months. Further proceedings on the transfer were stayed pending the decision on objections. The judgment emphasized procedural fairness without delving into the case&#039;s merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>