<?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>2009 (7) TMI 26 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34205</link>
    <description>The HC held the notice under s.143(2) was not served within the statutory period; provision of a dispatch number did not make that finding perverse. Because the notice was not validly served, the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make the assessment. The defect in service could not be cured under s.292BB. No substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 17:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72831" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 26 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34205</link>
      <description>The HC held the notice under s.143(2) was not served within the statutory period; provision of a dispatch number did not make that finding perverse. Because the notice was not validly served, the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to make the assessment. The defect in service could not be cured under s.292BB. No substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34205</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>