<?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>2024 (2) TMI 50 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448899</link>
    <description>The Bombay HC held that a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) does not mandatorily require a personal hearing, as the statute lacks specific language mandating such hearing. The court ruled that while the Income Tax Department may grant personal hearings voluntarily or upon request, refusal does not deprive the assessee of hearing opportunity. Regarding enquiry under Section 148A(a), the court interpreted &quot;if required&quot; as granting discretionary power to the Assessing Officer rather than creating a mandatory obligation. The court emphasized that harmonious interpretation requires treating &quot;shall&quot; as &quot;may&quot; in this context, while ensuring assessees receive adequate opportunity to contest notices under established legal procedures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 10:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 50 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448899</link>
      <description>The Bombay HC held that a show cause notice under Section 148A(b) does not mandatorily require a personal hearing, as the statute lacks specific language mandating such hearing. The court ruled that while the Income Tax Department may grant personal hearings voluntarily or upon request, refusal does not deprive the assessee of hearing opportunity. Regarding enquiry under Section 148A(a), the court interpreted &quot;if required&quot; as granting discretionary power to the Assessing Officer rather than creating a mandatory obligation. The court emphasized that harmonious interpretation requires treating &quot;shall&quot; as &quot;may&quot; in this context, while ensuring assessees receive adequate opportunity to contest notices under established legal procedures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>