<?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>2019 (5) TMI 2017 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458627</link>
    <description>The ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment proceedings initiated by ITO Nakodar were void ab initio due to lack of jurisdiction over a non-resident Indian assessee residing in UK. The ITO issued notices under section 148 to the assessee&#039;s old Nakodar address instead of his UK address, despite knowing his NRI status. The subsequent transfer to DCIT (IE) Chandigarh could not validate the void proceedings. Additionally, the ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions for unexplained cash deposits, finding that the assessee adequately explained the sources through sale proceeds of ancestral property share, supported by valuation reports and documentation. The appeal was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Nov 2024 19:12:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777220" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 2017 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458627</link>
      <description>The ITAT Chandigarh held that reassessment proceedings initiated by ITO Nakodar were void ab initio due to lack of jurisdiction over a non-resident Indian assessee residing in UK. The ITO issued notices under section 148 to the assessee&#039;s old Nakodar address instead of his UK address, despite knowing his NRI status. The subsequent transfer to DCIT (IE) Chandigarh could not validate the void proceedings. Additionally, the ITAT upheld CIT(A)&#039;s deletion of additions for unexplained cash deposits, finding that the assessee adequately explained the sources through sale proceeds of ancestral property share, supported by valuation reports and documentation. The appeal was decided in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458627</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>