<?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 (10) TMI 305 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399331</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the Writ Petition as the notice under Section 148 was barred by limitation, leading to the invalidation of the assessment order. The discrepancy in property values disclosed in returns and the sale deed was not deemed conclusive evidence. Consequently, the assessment order dated 30.12.2016 was quashed, and the related Miscellaneous Petition was closed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2020 11:47:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=624456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 305 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399331</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the Writ Petition as the notice under Section 148 was barred by limitation, leading to the invalidation of the assessment order. The discrepancy in property values disclosed in returns and the sale deed was not deemed conclusive evidence. Consequently, the assessment order dated 30.12.2016 was quashed, and the related Miscellaneous Petition was closed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>