<?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 (9) TMI 335 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442713</link>
    <description>HC set aside impugned assessment orders passed under s.144 and held they could not be sustained: petitioner had filed a return to the notice under s.153C, no show-cause opportunity under provisos to s.144(1) was given, and the orders lacked DIN and the prescribed format, rendering them void. HC held respondent lacked jurisdiction to proceed under s.153C where original assessments had not abated and no incriminating material relating to petitioner was found; previously allowed write-offs could not be reopened as change of opinion; and the condition for extending assessments beyond six years (asset of = ?50 lakhs) was not satisfied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Sep 2025 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725431" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 335 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442713</link>
      <description>HC set aside impugned assessment orders passed under s.144 and held they could not be sustained: petitioner had filed a return to the notice under s.153C, no show-cause opportunity under provisos to s.144(1) was given, and the orders lacked DIN and the prescribed format, rendering them void. HC held respondent lacked jurisdiction to proceed under s.153C where original assessments had not abated and no incriminating material relating to petitioner was found; previously allowed write-offs could not be reopened as change of opinion; and the condition for extending assessments beyond six years (asset of = ?50 lakhs) was not satisfied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>