<?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>Supreme court decision on 148 dated 03.10.2024</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119339</link>
    <description>The question is whether a subsequent reopening notice issued outside a court-identified sensitive window is valid where an original notice was issued within that window, mandatory pre-reopening correspondence was exchanged and the taxpayer responded within the allowed time; the operative issue is whether the later notice is a continuation of the earlier valid process or constitutes a procedurally infirm issuance outside the permitted timeframe.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2024 17:27:45 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:40:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=771994" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme court decision on 148 dated 03.10.2024</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119339</link>
      <description>The question is whether a subsequent reopening notice issued outside a court-identified sensitive window is valid where an original notice was issued within that window, mandatory pre-reopening correspondence was exchanged and the taxpayer responded within the allowed time; the operative issue is whether the later notice is a continuation of the earlier valid process or constitutes a procedurally infirm issuance outside the permitted timeframe.</description>
      <category>Discussion-Forum</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2024 17:27:45 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119339</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>