<?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>2010 (2) TMI 16 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35361</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in a case involving jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under Section 158 BC read with Section 158 BD of the Income Tax Act for a block assessment from 1st April, 1989 to 27th July, 1999. The Court found that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction as the required satisfaction under Section 158 BD was not recorded. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 10:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 16 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35361</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in a case involving jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under Section 158 BC read with Section 158 BD of the Income Tax Act for a block assessment from 1st April, 1989 to 27th July, 1999. The Court found that the Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction as the required satisfaction under Section 158 BD was not recorded. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed as it did not raise any substantial question of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35361</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>