<?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 (10) TMI 16 - ALLABAHAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34755</link>
    <description>The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the notices issued under section 147 of the Income Tax Act for the relevant assessment years. The Court held that the Valuation Cell&#039;s report was not a valid basis for reassessment, as it did not provide sufficient grounds to believe that income had escaped assessment. The Court emphasized that the discrepancies in investment amounts disclosed by the petitioner and the Valuation Cell&#039;s estimation were not substantial enough to warrant reassessment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 16 - ALLABAHAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34755</link>
      <description>The Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the notices issued under section 147 of the Income Tax Act for the relevant assessment years. The Court held that the Valuation Cell&#039;s report was not a valid basis for reassessment, as it did not provide sufficient grounds to believe that income had escaped assessment. The Court emphasized that the discrepancies in investment amounts disclosed by the petitioner and the Valuation Cell&#039;s estimation were not substantial enough to warrant reassessment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34755</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>