<?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 1628 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769714</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the revenue&#039;s reassessment proceedings for assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05 concerning excess deduction claims under Section 80IB. For the first two years, reassessment was initiated beyond the four-year limitation period, requiring the department to prove non-disclosure of material facts under Section 147&#039;s proviso. The court found the assessee had made full disclosure despite clerical errors in Form 10CCB regarding commencement dates, which were inadvertent mistakes rather than intentional suppression. The errors actually disadvantaged the assessee, showing no animus to conceal information. For 2004-05, no material justified reopening the assessment within the four-year period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 08:38:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=818298" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1628 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769714</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the revenue&#039;s reassessment proceedings for assessment years 2002-03, 2003-04, and 2004-05 concerning excess deduction claims under Section 80IB. For the first two years, reassessment was initiated beyond the four-year limitation period, requiring the department to prove non-disclosure of material facts under Section 147&#039;s proviso. The court found the assessee had made full disclosure despite clerical errors in Form 10CCB regarding commencement dates, which were inadvertent mistakes rather than intentional suppression. The errors actually disadvantaged the assessee, showing no animus to conceal information. For 2004-05, no material justified reopening the assessment within the four-year period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>