<?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 (12) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415259</link>
    <description>The High Court quashed the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and the order rejecting the Petitioner&#039;s objections. The Court ruled that the Assessing Officer lacked tangible material to justify the reopening of the assessment within four years, emphasizing the requirement of &quot;reason to believe&quot; for such actions and distinguishing between review and reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2021 08:50:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662512" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 25 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415259</link>
      <description>The High Court quashed the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act and the order rejecting the Petitioner&#039;s objections. The Court ruled that the Assessing Officer lacked tangible material to justify the reopening of the assessment within four years, emphasizing the requirement of &quot;reason to believe&quot; for such actions and distinguishing between review and reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>