<?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 945 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399971</link>
    <description>HC held that the assessment dated 18/12/2009 was void ab initio because the AO failed to furnish the draft assessment order under s.144C(1), breaching principles of natural justice. Relying on precedent, the court found the order to be without jurisdiction and therefore null, and rejected the ITAT&#039;s distinction that prior decisions arose from writ petitions rather than appeals. The assessment was set aside and the decision was rendered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2025 11:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626010" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 945 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399971</link>
      <description>HC held that the assessment dated 18/12/2009 was void ab initio because the AO failed to furnish the draft assessment order under s.144C(1), breaching principles of natural justice. Relying on precedent, the court found the order to be without jurisdiction and therefore null, and rejected the ITAT&#039;s distinction that prior decisions arose from writ petitions rather than appeals. The assessment was set aside and the decision was rendered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399971</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>