<?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>2012 (6) TMI 927 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311447</link>
    <description>The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings due to the absence of a notice issued under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, which is a mandatory requirement during reassessment proceedings under sections 147 and 148. The Tribunal found the reassessment to be without jurisdiction, aligning with established legal precedents. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, and the assessment was set aside, rendering further examination of jurisdictional matters and the merits of the case unnecessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2023 15:36:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 927 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311447</link>
      <description>The Tribunal quashed the reassessment proceedings due to the absence of a notice issued under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, which is a mandatory requirement during reassessment proceedings under sections 147 and 148. The Tribunal found the reassessment to be without jurisdiction, aligning with established legal precedents. Consequently, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee, and the assessment was set aside, rendering further examination of jurisdictional matters and the merits of the case unnecessary.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311447</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>