<?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>2023 (1) TMI 420 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432673</link>
    <description>The court quashed the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in favor of the petitioner. The notice challenged payments made to foreign entities without tax deduction and an One Time Settlement (OTS) with a bank. The court found that the issues raised by the assessing officer were already decided in favor of the petitioner in a previous judgment. It was confirmed that the judgment remained undisturbed, leading the court to conclude that the notice could not be sustained and therefore, was quashed. Additionally, the court dismissed the claim against the petitioner for recovery related to the OTS with the bank, emphasizing the assessing officer&#039;s lack of due diligence in issuing the notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Aug 2023 17:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=701306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 420 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432673</link>
      <description>The court quashed the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in favor of the petitioner. The notice challenged payments made to foreign entities without tax deduction and an One Time Settlement (OTS) with a bank. The court found that the issues raised by the assessing officer were already decided in favor of the petitioner in a previous judgment. It was confirmed that the judgment remained undisturbed, leading the court to conclude that the notice could not be sustained and therefore, was quashed. Additionally, the court dismissed the claim against the petitioner for recovery related to the OTS with the bank, emphasizing the assessing officer&#039;s lack of due diligence in issuing the notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432673</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>