<?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 (4) TMI 1807 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468350</link>
    <description>A reassessment notice under Section 148 was challenged as jurisdiction because, under the circular dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC was said to have exclusive power to issue such notice. Earlier coordinate bench decisions had already decided the same jurisdictional point, and the revenue did not dispute their applicability. The petition was disposed of by following that binding view, with the revenue left free to proceed in accordance with law if so advised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 18:58:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 1807 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468350</link>
      <description>A reassessment notice under Section 148 was challenged as jurisdiction because, under the circular dated 29.03.2022, the NFAC was said to have exclusive power to issue such notice. Earlier coordinate bench decisions had already decided the same jurisdictional point, and the revenue did not dispute their applicability. The petition was disposed of by following that binding view, with the revenue left free to proceed in accordance with law if so advised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468350</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>