<?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 428 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432681</link>
    <description>The court held that the unsigned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was invalid, leading to a lack of jurisdiction for reassessment proceedings. Citing the necessity of a valid notice for jurisdiction, the court deemed the unsigned notice as a fundamental flaw, rendering subsequent actions void. As a result, the court quashed the invalid notice and related orders, concluding that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to proceed with reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2023 15:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=701317" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 428 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432681</link>
      <description>The court held that the unsigned notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act was invalid, leading to a lack of jurisdiction for reassessment proceedings. Citing the necessity of a valid notice for jurisdiction, the court deemed the unsigned notice as a fundamental flaw, rendering subsequent actions void. As a result, the court quashed the invalid notice and related orders, concluding that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to proceed with reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>