<?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 (11) TMI 67 - ITAT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68849</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for the assessment year 1969-70, recognizing the appellant&#039;s arguments regarding the classification of conduit pipes as single-point goods for tax purposes. The decision highlighted the significance of consistency in tax treatment and the consideration of ISI specifications in determining the nature of goods. Appeals for the subsequent assessment years were dismissed as the appellant did not pursue them. The Tribunal also raised concerns about the assessing authority&#039;s jurisdiction to revise assessments and emphasized the entitlement to tax adjustment/refund for excess tax paid to ensure fairness and prevent double advantage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 10:49:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (11) TMI 67 - ITAT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68849</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal for the assessment year 1969-70, recognizing the appellant&#039;s arguments regarding the classification of conduit pipes as single-point goods for tax purposes. The decision highlighted the significance of consistency in tax treatment and the consideration of ISI specifications in determining the nature of goods. Appeals for the subsequent assessment years were dismissed as the appellant did not pursue them. The Tribunal also raised concerns about the assessing authority&#039;s jurisdiction to revise assessments and emphasized the entitlement to tax adjustment/refund for excess tax paid to ensure fairness and prevent double advantage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>