<?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 753 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449602</link>
    <description>The Rajasthan HC quashed an order under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act for failing to follow prescribed procedures. The Assessing Officer did not properly consider the assessee&#039;s reply and material on record while passing the reopening order. The court found that the AO failed to pass a speaking order addressing specific objections raised by the assessee regarding cash loan additions and interest received. The HC held that mandatory procedural requirements under Section 148A were not followed, making the order unsustainable. The court exercised writ jurisdiction despite alternative remedies being available, as the case involved jurisdictional issues and procedural violations going to the root of reassessment proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2025 14:34:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 753 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449602</link>
      <description>The Rajasthan HC quashed an order under Section 148A of the Income Tax Act for failing to follow prescribed procedures. The Assessing Officer did not properly consider the assessee&#039;s reply and material on record while passing the reopening order. The court found that the AO failed to pass a speaking order addressing specific objections raised by the assessee regarding cash loan additions and interest received. The HC held that mandatory procedural requirements under Section 148A were not followed, making the order unsustainable. The court exercised writ jurisdiction despite alternative remedies being available, as the case involved jurisdictional issues and procedural violations going to the root of reassessment proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>