<?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 1054 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417589</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ appeal filed by the Revenue, upholding the order of the learned single Judge. The reassessment proceedings based on the subsequent sale of the property were deemed legally unsustainable. The court found no omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts, and there was no justification for reopening the assessments. The plea of alternative remedy was also rightly rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2022 17:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=668298" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 1054 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417589</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ appeal filed by the Revenue, upholding the order of the learned single Judge. The reassessment proceedings based on the subsequent sale of the property were deemed legally unsustainable. The court found no omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose material facts, and there was no justification for reopening the assessments. The plea of alternative remedy was also rightly rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417589</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>