<?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 (11) TMI 170 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780702</link>
    <description>HC held that the impugned assessment order was a final assessment, as immediately followed by a demand notice, and the revenue could not thereafter treat it as a draft assessment by issuing a corrigendum. Relying on the Court&#039;s prior precedent (Google Ireland), the HC ruled that converting a final assessment into a draft after issuing a demand is impermissible. The assessment order, the subsequent demand notice and the corrigendum were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:03:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=862031" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 170 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780702</link>
      <description>HC held that the impugned assessment order was a final assessment, as immediately followed by a demand notice, and the revenue could not thereafter treat it as a draft assessment by issuing a corrigendum. Relying on the Court&#039;s prior precedent (Google Ireland), the HC ruled that converting a final assessment into a draft after issuing a demand is impermissible. The assessment order, the subsequent demand notice and the corrigendum were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780702</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>