<?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>1994 (3) TMI 43 - KERALA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19789</link>
    <description>A statutory notice issued to reopen an assessment was jurisdictional in nature and had to allow not less than thirty days for filing the return. A notice granting only six days failed to meet that mandatory requirement, so it was invalid. Because the notice was the foundation of the reassessment proceedings, its invalidity vitiated the reassessment order, which could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:11:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=58788" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 43 - KERALA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19789</link>
      <description>A statutory notice issued to reopen an assessment was jurisdictional in nature and had to allow not less than thirty days for filing the return. A notice granting only six days failed to meet that mandatory requirement, so it was invalid. Because the notice was the foundation of the reassessment proceedings, its invalidity vitiated the reassessment order, which could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>