<?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>2019 (4) TMI 1364 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378920</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the assessment orders for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 were invalid and unsustainable in law due to the absence of valid notices under Section 143(2) issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. As a result, the Tribunal quashed the assessment orders. The Tribunal refrained from addressing the merits of the addition made by the Assessing Officer out of agricultural income. The appeals for both assessment years were allowed based on the jurisdictional issue regarding the invalid notices.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2019 18:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1364 - ITAT AMRITSAR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378920</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the assessment orders for A.Y. 2012-13 and A.Y. 2013-14 were invalid and unsustainable in law due to the absence of valid notices under Section 143(2) issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. As a result, the Tribunal quashed the assessment orders. The Tribunal refrained from addressing the merits of the addition made by the Assessing Officer out of agricultural income. The appeals for both assessment years were allowed based on the jurisdictional issue regarding the invalid notices.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>