<?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 (4) TMI 1280 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769366</link>
    <description>SC dismissed the special leave petition, upholding the HC&#039;s order that notices issued in the petitioner&#039;s name cannot be invalidated merely because they reference a non-existent company. The Court found no reason to interfere with the HC&#039;s findings concerning reopening assessments and the validity of notices issued under the unamended Section 148 post-01.04.2021, as well as the scope of section 148A.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Sep 2025 11:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=816779" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1280 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769366</link>
      <description>SC dismissed the special leave petition, upholding the HC&#039;s order that notices issued in the petitioner&#039;s name cannot be invalidated merely because they reference a non-existent company. The Court found no reason to interfere with the HC&#039;s findings concerning reopening assessments and the validity of notices issued under the unamended Section 148 post-01.04.2021, as well as the scope of section 148A.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>