<?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 (5) TMI 30 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751977</link>
    <description>The ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment proceedings under Section 147 due to jurisdictional defect. The AO failed to issue mandatory notice under Section 143(2) before finalizing reassessment order. Following Delhi HC precedent in Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd., the tribunal held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory even in reassessment proceedings, despite assessee&#039;s participation pursuant to Section 148 notice. The reassessment was declared invalid and proceedings were quashed in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 15:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 30 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751977</link>
      <description>The ITAT Mumbai quashed reassessment proceedings under Section 147 due to jurisdictional defect. The AO failed to issue mandatory notice under Section 143(2) before finalizing reassessment order. Following Delhi HC precedent in Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd., the tribunal held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory even in reassessment proceedings, despite assessee&#039;s participation pursuant to Section 148 notice. The reassessment was declared invalid and proceedings were quashed in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>