<?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>1978 (2) TMI 110 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62123</link>
    <description>Amortization was allowed on the basis of circulars in force at the start of the assessment year, and a later circular did not displace the governing circular that specifically required pending appellate matters to be completed under its guidelines. The appellate authority and the Tribunal applied that operative circular, so the Commissioner&#039;s request for reference was inconsistent with the Board&#039;s own instructions and did not raise a referable question of law. The reference application was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:55:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=100569" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (2) TMI 110 - ITAT COCHIN</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62123</link>
      <description>Amortization was allowed on the basis of circulars in force at the start of the assessment year, and a later circular did not displace the governing circular that specifically required pending appellate matters to be completed under its guidelines. The appellate authority and the Tribunal applied that operative circular, so the Commissioner&#039;s request for reference was inconsistent with the Board&#039;s own instructions and did not raise a referable question of law. The reference application was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62123</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>