<?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>2019 (8) TMI 1616 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292330</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, ruling that the reopening notice was without jurisdiction due to the absence of recorded reasons, and that section 292B of the Act did not apply. The appeal was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Dec 2020 06:17:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=630619" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1616 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292330</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, ruling that the reopening notice was without jurisdiction due to the absence of recorded reasons, and that section 292B of the Act did not apply. The appeal was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>