<?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>2024 (4) TMI 1323 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464460</link>
    <description>An assessment order under Section 143(3) was challenged on the ground that no show cause notice was issued and no opportunity was given to file a reply. That omission was treated as a patent breach of natural justice, and the availability of an alternative appellate remedy did not bar interference on these exceptional facts. The impugned assessment was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after considering the taxpayer&#039;s reply and granting a hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Oct 2025 20:27:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=861216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 1323 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464460</link>
      <description>An assessment order under Section 143(3) was challenged on the ground that no show cause notice was issued and no opportunity was given to file a reply. That omission was treated as a patent breach of natural justice, and the availability of an alternative appellate remedy did not bar interference on these exceptional facts. The impugned assessment was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after considering the taxpayer&#039;s reply and granting a hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>