<?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 (7) TMI 906 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755686</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petition, quashing the notices issued under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d), and 148 of the Income Tax Act due to jurisdictional issues. It ruled that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer lacked authority under the faceless assessment scheme, issuing a Writ of Certiorari to set aside the impugned notices, favoring the petitioner without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jul 2024 08:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=760413" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 906 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755686</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petition, quashing the notices issued under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d), and 148 of the Income Tax Act due to jurisdictional issues. It ruled that the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer lacked authority under the faceless assessment scheme, issuing a Writ of Certiorari to set aside the impugned notices, favoring the petitioner without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>