<?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 (10) TMI 260 - ITAT SURAT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800317</link>
    <description>Section 250(6) requires appellate orders to identify issues, decisions and reasons. Sending hearing notices to an email address other than the one supplied in the appeal form, coupled with an ex parte assessment, justified restoration for fresh adjudication after an effective hearing. Under section 272A(1)(d), non-compliance with a notice under section 143(2) and the first notice under section 142(1) constituted separate defaults. Successive section 142(1) notices concerning similar issues constituted one continuing default rather than separate penal defaults. Penalty liability was accordingly confined to the two distinct defaults, and penalties for the remaining successive notices were deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 08:13:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=927871" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 260 - ITAT SURAT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800317</link>
      <description>Section 250(6) requires appellate orders to identify issues, decisions and reasons. Sending hearing notices to an email address other than the one supplied in the appeal form, coupled with an ex parte assessment, justified restoration for fresh adjudication after an effective hearing. Under section 272A(1)(d), non-compliance with a notice under section 143(2) and the first notice under section 142(1) constituted separate defaults. Successive section 142(1) notices concerning similar issues constituted one continuing default rather than separate penal defaults. Penalty liability was accordingly confined to the two distinct defaults, and penalties for the remaining successive notices were deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800317</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>