<?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>1979 (9) TMI 207 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288827</link>
    <description>The petition challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the IT Act was dismissed. The Court held that all conditions for issuing the notice were met, including jurisdiction of the ITO, approval from the CBDT, and ownership of the duplicate books of account. The notice was found to be valid as it was issued within the time limit and after necessary approvals. The Court concluded that the ITO had the authority to issue the notice, and the petition lacked merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2020 15:29:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=616371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (9) TMI 207 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288827</link>
      <description>The petition challenging the notice issued under Section 148 of the IT Act was dismissed. The Court held that all conditions for issuing the notice were met, including jurisdiction of the ITO, approval from the CBDT, and ownership of the duplicate books of account. The notice was found to be valid as it was issued within the time limit and after necessary approvals. The Court concluded that the ITO had the authority to issue the notice, and the petition lacked merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Sep 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>