<?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 (8) TMI 217 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776030</link>
    <description>Issuance of notices by the Faceless Assessment Officer is mandatory where the faceless assessment regime applies, and notices issued instead by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer cannot be sustained. Following Hexaware Technologies Ltd., the Madras HC held that, absent any stay of the earlier judgment, the impugned notices were invalid. The notices were quashed and set aside, and the petitions were disposed of in favour of the assessees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 14:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=840604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 217 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776030</link>
      <description>Issuance of notices by the Faceless Assessment Officer is mandatory where the faceless assessment regime applies, and notices issued instead by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer cannot be sustained. Following Hexaware Technologies Ltd., the Madras HC held that, absent any stay of the earlier judgment, the impugned notices were invalid. The notices were quashed and set aside, and the petitions were disposed of in favour of the assessees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>