<?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 (6) TMI 129 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438555</link>
    <description>The Division Bench upheld that the order issued by the Transfer Pricing Officer on 01.11.2019 for the assessment year 2016-17 was time-barred under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act, as it exceeded the sixty-day limitation period prior to the assessment order deadline of 31.12.2019. The Division Bench&#039;s decision led to the quashing of the order and closure of the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jun 2023 08:55:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=715457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 129 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438555</link>
      <description>The Division Bench upheld that the order issued by the Transfer Pricing Officer on 01.11.2019 for the assessment year 2016-17 was time-barred under Section 92CA(3A) of the Income Tax Act, as it exceeded the sixty-day limitation period prior to the assessment order deadline of 31.12.2019. The Division Bench&#039;s decision led to the quashing of the order and closure of the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438555</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>