<?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 1485 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785729</link>
    <description>Validity of ICDS adjustment in an intimation under Section 143(1) is examined: failure to give the required written or electronic intimation of the proposed ICDS adjustment and failure to consider any response breaches the principles of natural justice and the jurisdictional provisos to Section 143(1), and consequently an adjustment made without such prior intimation and opportunity to be heard is liable to be quashed and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 09:22:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=882282" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 1485 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785729</link>
      <description>Validity of ICDS adjustment in an intimation under Section 143(1) is examined: failure to give the required written or electronic intimation of the proposed ICDS adjustment and failure to consider any response breaches the principles of natural justice and the jurisdictional provisos to Section 143(1), and consequently an adjustment made without such prior intimation and opportunity to be heard is liable to be quashed and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>