<?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 (8) TMI 1085 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757381</link>
    <description>HC held impugned notices under s.148 invalid for non-compliance with s.151A and for being issued by a JAO who lacked jurisdiction under the Central Government notification dated 29 Mar 2022. Relying on the court&#039;s prior decision in Hexaware, the HC found the notices illegal and void as the JAO could not issue them in place of the Faceless Assessing Officer. The petition was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 11:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765095" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1085 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757381</link>
      <description>HC held impugned notices under s.148 invalid for non-compliance with s.151A and for being issued by a JAO who lacked jurisdiction under the Central Government notification dated 29 Mar 2022. Relying on the court&#039;s prior decision in Hexaware, the HC found the notices illegal and void as the JAO could not issue them in place of the Faceless Assessing Officer. The petition was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757381</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>