<?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 830 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417365</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen the original assessment beyond the four-year period under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The AO failed to specify that the income escaped assessment due to the assessee&#039;s failure to disclose all material facts, as required by the first proviso to Section 147. Consequently, the notice issued under Section 148 and all subsequent actions were quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 08:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667832" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 830 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417365</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to reopen the original assessment beyond the four-year period under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The AO failed to specify that the income escaped assessment due to the assessee&#039;s failure to disclose all material facts, as required by the first proviso to Section 147. Consequently, the notice issued under Section 148 and all subsequent actions were quashed, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>