<?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 (12) TMI 829 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389946</link>
    <description>A notice for reopening an assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year requires prior satisfaction of the authorities named in section 151(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Approval by an Additional Commissioner does not meet that jurisdictional precondition because the officer is not one of the authorities specified in the statute. The recorded approval was therefore invalid, and the section 148 notice was held liable to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Dec 2019 19:24:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=597849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 829 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389946</link>
      <description>A notice for reopening an assessment beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment year requires prior satisfaction of the authorities named in section 151(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Approval by an Additional Commissioner does not meet that jurisdictional precondition because the officer is not one of the authorities specified in the statute. The recorded approval was therefore invalid, and the section 148 notice was held liable to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389946</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>