<?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>2025 (3) TMI 880 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767494</link>
    <description>Calcutta HC dismissed a writ petition challenging an assessment order on grounds of limitation and absence of DIN. The court held that limitation involves mixed questions of fact and law requiring detailed examination, not summary consideration on affidavits. Regarding DIN absence, the court noted the technical nature of the issue and that SC had stayed a similar HC order. The court emphasized that alternative efficacious remedies were available through statutory tribunals, making the writ petition under Article 226 non-maintainable, citing recent SC precedent that HCs should not substitute themselves as decision-making authorities when statutory remedies exist.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2025 06:45:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=807295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 880 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767494</link>
      <description>Calcutta HC dismissed a writ petition challenging an assessment order on grounds of limitation and absence of DIN. The court held that limitation involves mixed questions of fact and law requiring detailed examination, not summary consideration on affidavits. Regarding DIN absence, the court noted the technical nature of the issue and that SC had stayed a similar HC order. The court emphasized that alternative efficacious remedies were available through statutory tribunals, making the writ petition under Article 226 non-maintainable, citing recent SC precedent that HCs should not substitute themselves as decision-making authorities when statutory remedies exist.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767494</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>