<?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 876 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770604</link>
    <description>Where a minor child&#039;s income had already been clubbed in the mother&#039;s return, reassessment and addition in the father&#039;s hands were unsustainable because the notice proceeded against a person who was not the correct assessee for that income. The analysis treated the clubbing disclosure as decisive on the facts, and held that reopening could not validly fasten the disputed income on the father. The reassessment and resulting addition were therefore deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 May 2025 18:25:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=821576" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 876 - ITAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770604</link>
      <description>Where a minor child&#039;s income had already been clubbed in the mother&#039;s return, reassessment and addition in the father&#039;s hands were unsustainable because the notice proceeded against a person who was not the correct assessee for that income. The analysis treated the clubbing disclosure as decisive on the facts, and held that reopening could not validly fasten the disputed income on the father. The reassessment and resulting addition were therefore deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770604</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>