<?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 (2) TMI 1234 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463241</link>
    <description>HC held reassessment for AY 2017-18 invalid where reopening occurred beyond three years and sanction was granted only by the PCIT. Court affirmed that TOLA 2020 does not alter identification of the competent authority under s.151, and sanction by PCIT alone is inadequate to sustain reassessment commenced after the three-year period; accordingly the reassessment action was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2025 20:18:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=844137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 1234 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463241</link>
      <description>HC held reassessment for AY 2017-18 invalid where reopening occurred beyond three years and sanction was granted only by the PCIT. Court affirmed that TOLA 2020 does not alter identification of the competent authority under s.151, and sanction by PCIT alone is inadequate to sustain reassessment commenced after the three-year period; accordingly the reassessment action was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>