<?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>2022 (1) TMI 126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416661</link>
    <description>The court held that the reopening of the assessment was based on a mere change of opinion and not on any new tangible material. It concluded that the Assessing Officer had already considered the primary facts during the original assessment proceedings. Therefore, the court quashed the notice and order, ruling in favor of the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2022 07:24:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666124" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 126 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416661</link>
      <description>The court held that the reopening of the assessment was based on a mere change of opinion and not on any new tangible material. It concluded that the Assessing Officer had already considered the primary facts during the original assessment proceedings. Therefore, the court quashed the notice and order, ruling in favor of the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>