https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765543 Madras HC set aside the speaking order dated 18.03.2022 and remanded the matter back to the Income Tax Department. The court held that despite a typographical error in the notice address, the section 148 notice was valid as the petitioner had claimed exemption under India-Singapore DTAA without filing proper return of income. However, the department failed to consider CBDT Circular No.3/2016 and the fact that petitioner subsequently filed return manually on 02.03.2022, warranting fresh consideration of the case. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Feb 2025 08:13:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765543 Madras HC set aside the speaking order dated 18.03.2022 and remanded the matter back to the Income Tax Department. The court held that despite a typographical error in the notice address, the section 148 notice was valid as the petitioner had claimed exemption under India-Singapore DTAA without filing proper return of income. However, the department failed to consider CBDT Circular No.3/2016 and the fact that petitioner subsequently filed return manually on 02.03.2022, warranting fresh consideration of the case. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765543