<?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 (6) TMI 337 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395962</link>
    <description>The ITAT quashed the notice issued under section 148 for reopening the assessment as the AO had already considered the gifts from HUF in the original assessment without providing valid reasons for reopening. The ITAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, partly allowing the assessee&#039;s cross objections regarding the interpretation of the term &#039;relative&#039; under section 56(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2020 11:44:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 337 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395962</link>
      <description>The ITAT quashed the notice issued under section 148 for reopening the assessment as the AO had already considered the gifts from HUF in the original assessment without providing valid reasons for reopening. The ITAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, partly allowing the assessee&#039;s cross objections regarding the interpretation of the term &#039;relative&#039; under section 56(2)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>