<?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>1982 (9) TMI 133 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67833</link>
    <description>A debatable question on whether a minor&#039;s interest income could be included in the assessee&#039;s assessment could not be treated as a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. The attempted post-assessment inclusion required fresh adjudication rather than correction of an obvious error, so the rectification power could not be used to alter the assessment on that issue. The absence of an appeal against the later order did not make the matter immune from rectification proceedings, but it also did not expand rectification jurisdiction to cover a disputed point of law. The inclusion of the minor&#039;s interest income was therefore without jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:43:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106268" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (9) TMI 133 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67833</link>
      <description>A debatable question on whether a minor&#039;s interest income could be included in the assessee&#039;s assessment could not be treated as a mistake apparent from the record for rectification purposes. The attempted post-assessment inclusion required fresh adjudication rather than correction of an obvious error, so the rectification power could not be used to alter the assessment on that issue. The absence of an appeal against the later order did not make the matter immune from rectification proceedings, but it also did not expand rectification jurisdiction to cover a disputed point of law. The inclusion of the minor&#039;s interest income was therefore without jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 18 Sep 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>