<?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>2020 (3) TMI 284 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393140</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petition, quashing the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The reopening of the assessment was found to be based on incorrect facts and a mere change of opinion. The petitioner was entitled to the deduction under section 80IB(10) as the housing project was approved by GUDA on 06.02.2008. There was no failure to disclose material facts, and the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2020 10:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=606140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 284 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393140</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petition, quashing the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12. The reopening of the assessment was found to be based on incorrect facts and a mere change of opinion. The petitioner was entitled to the deduction under section 80IB(10) as the housing project was approved by GUDA on 06.02.2008. There was no failure to disclose material facts, and the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to reopen the assessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>