<?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>2026 (1) TMI 453 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784697</link>
    <description>For computing the ten assessment years under section 153A read with Explanation 1, the Tribunal applied the binding rule that the period runs from the end of the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. On that basis, assessment year 2010-11 fell outside the permissible ten-year block. The Tribunal therefore held that the notice and consequential assessment were barred by limitation and that assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A was invalid, rendering the additions academic.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:25:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=877327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 453 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784697</link>
      <description>For computing the ten assessment years under section 153A read with Explanation 1, the Tribunal applied the binding rule that the period runs from the end of the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search was conducted. On that basis, assessment year 2010-11 fell outside the permissible ten-year block. The Tribunal therefore held that the notice and consequential assessment were barred by limitation and that assumption of jurisdiction under section 153A was invalid, rendering the additions academic.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784697</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>