<?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>1990 (10) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63424</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Wealth Tax Officer&#039;s failure to refer the property valuation matter to the Valuation Officer was a procedural irregularity. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was deemed to have the jurisdiction to direct correction of such irregularities. The appeal was partially allowed, with certain issues remitted for reassessment by the Wealth Tax Officer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Jan 2011 18:37:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=101866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 137 - ITAT DELHI-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63424</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Wealth Tax Officer&#039;s failure to refer the property valuation matter to the Valuation Officer was a procedural irregularity. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was deemed to have the jurisdiction to direct correction of such irregularities. The appeal was partially allowed, with certain issues remitted for reassessment by the Wealth Tax Officer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=63424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>