<?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 (8) TMI 1823 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469156</link>
    <description>A notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 must grant the assessee not less than seven days to respond. Where the notice required a reply within a shorter period, it failed to meet the statutory minimum and was unsustainable. Following an earlier coordinate bench view on the same question, the HC held that the impugned notice did not satisfy the mandatory response-period requirement, and the challenge to the notice succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 12:09:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (8) TMI 1823 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469156</link>
      <description>A notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 must grant the assessee not less than seven days to respond. Where the notice required a reply within a shorter period, it failed to meet the statutory minimum and was unsustainable. Following an earlier coordinate bench view on the same question, the HC held that the impugned notice did not satisfy the mandatory response-period requirement, and the challenge to the notice succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>