<?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 (5) TMI 525 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770253</link>
    <description>Centralisation of group assessment cases was upheld under the Income-tax Act where incriminating material was found across different premises and a coordinated investigation was required. The HC applied the principle that transfer under Section 127 is justified when a unified assessment exercise is necessary and no mala fides are shown. On that basis, the challenge to the transfer and centralisation order failed, and the Revenue&#039;s action remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 09:13:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=820321" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 525 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770253</link>
      <description>Centralisation of group assessment cases was upheld under the Income-tax Act where incriminating material was found across different premises and a coordinated investigation was required. The HC applied the principle that transfer under Section 127 is justified when a unified assessment exercise is necessary and no mala fides are shown. On that basis, the challenge to the transfer and centralisation order failed, and the Revenue&#039;s action remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>