<?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>1975 (6) TMI 18 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60538</link>
    <description>The Tribunal annulled the assessments as the ITO lacked a bona fide belief that the income chargeable to tax, which had escaped assessment, would amount to Rs. 50,000 or more per year. The notices issued under Section 148 were deemed invalid due to being served beyond the statutory time limit. Despite this, the Tribunal upheld the Department&#039;s argument that the assessee failed to fully disclose all necessary material facts for assessment. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the assessments were annulled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 18:09:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=98985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (6) TMI 18 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60538</link>
      <description>The Tribunal annulled the assessments as the ITO lacked a bona fide belief that the income chargeable to tax, which had escaped assessment, would amount to Rs. 50,000 or more per year. The notices issued under Section 148 were deemed invalid due to being served beyond the statutory time limit. Despite this, the Tribunal upheld the Department&#039;s argument that the assessee failed to fully disclose all necessary material facts for assessment. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, and the assessments were annulled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=60538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>