<?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 996 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400022</link>
    <description>The court held that the re-assessment was deemed a change of opinion as all issues were based on materials available during the original assessment. No new tangible material was presented, and the conditions under Section 147 were not met. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petitions, quashing both the impugned order and the re-assessment order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Oct 2020 19:32:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (10) TMI 996 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400022</link>
      <description>The court held that the re-assessment was deemed a change of opinion as all issues were based on materials available during the original assessment. No new tangible material was presented, and the conditions under Section 147 were not met. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petitions, quashing both the impugned order and the re-assessment order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>