<?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 (11) TMI 1160 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762174</link>
    <description>The ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of a non-resident Indian assessee challenging the jurisdiction of AO Surat in issuing notice under section 148A. The assessee&#039;s address was recorded as Bokaro, Jharkhand in both the assessment order and income tax return. Following the precedent in Cosmet Traders Pvt. Ltd, the tribunal held that ITO Surat lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice, declaring it invalid. Consequently, the subsequent assessment order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=779157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1160 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762174</link>
      <description>The ITAT Kolkata ruled in favor of a non-resident Indian assessee challenging the jurisdiction of AO Surat in issuing notice under section 148A. The assessee&#039;s address was recorded as Bokaro, Jharkhand in both the assessment order and income tax return. Following the precedent in Cosmet Traders Pvt. Ltd, the tribunal held that ITO Surat lacked jurisdiction to issue the notice, declaring it invalid. Consequently, the subsequent assessment order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762174</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>