<?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>2021 (8) TMI 568 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410990</link>
    <description>Reopening of a completed assessment after four years was invalid where the reassessment relied on the same sale deed and related materials already furnished during the original Section 143(3) proceedings. As no new tangible material was shown and the record did not establish any failure by the assessee to fully and truly disclose the primary facts, the statutory basis for reopening was absent. The reassessment could not be sustained and the original assessment remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Aug 2021 09:27:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=652728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 568 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410990</link>
      <description>Reopening of a completed assessment after four years was invalid where the reassessment relied on the same sale deed and related materials already furnished during the original Section 143(3) proceedings. As no new tangible material was shown and the record did not establish any failure by the assessee to fully and truly disclose the primary facts, the statutory basis for reopening was absent. The reassessment could not be sustained and the original assessment remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410990</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>