<?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 (9) TMI 924 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398805</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the orders passed by the Assessing Officer, CIT(A), and the Tribunal were set aside. The substantial questions of law were answered in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the reassessment notice was barred by limitation and thus invalid. The Tribunal and lower authorities committed errors in interpreting the legal provisions concerning the limitation period and the applicability of directions for reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=623116" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 924 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398805</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the orders passed by the Assessing Officer, CIT(A), and the Tribunal were set aside. The substantial questions of law were answered in favor of the assessee, emphasizing that the reassessment notice was barred by limitation and thus invalid. The Tribunal and lower authorities committed errors in interpreting the legal provisions concerning the limitation period and the applicability of directions for reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398805</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>