<?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 1146 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755926</link>
    <description>Reopening of assessment after four years concerned whether the assessee had failed to disclose material facts in relation to gain on sale of land and whether the land was stock in trade or a capital asset. The Bombay HC had held that there was no failure to disclose any material fact and that, on that ground, the notice under section 148 had to be quashed. Following an earlier SC order on the same issue, the present Special Leave Petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2024 12:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=761108" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1146 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755926</link>
      <description>Reopening of assessment after four years concerned whether the assessee had failed to disclose material facts in relation to gain on sale of land and whether the land was stock in trade or a capital asset. The Bombay HC had held that there was no failure to disclose any material fact and that, on that ground, the notice under section 148 had to be quashed. Following an earlier SC order on the same issue, the present Special Leave Petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755926</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>