<?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>1997 (4) TMI 120 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67538</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the valuation of the property as per Rule 1BB for the assessment year 1983-84, rejecting the department&#039;s objections. For the assessment year 1987-88, the Tribunal ruled that the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the Assessing Officer&#039;s order passed under section 16(1)/25(2), thereby restoring the original assessment order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:51:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105973" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 120 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67538</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the valuation of the property as per Rule 1BB for the assessment year 1983-84, rejecting the department&#039;s objections. For the assessment year 1987-88, the Tribunal ruled that the Dy. Commissioner (Appeals) lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal against the Assessing Officer&#039;s order passed under section 16(1)/25(2), thereby restoring the original assessment order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>