<?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>1985 (1) TMI 139 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70493</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction under section 263 was barred as the issue of bonus deduction could have been considered by the first appellate authority. Consequently, the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner&#039;s order under section 263 was set aside, without addressing the merits of the disallowance directed by the Commissioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Apr 2011 14:33:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (1) TMI 139 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70493</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Commissioner&#039;s jurisdiction under section 263 was barred as the issue of bonus deduction could have been considered by the first appellate authority. Consequently, the assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Commissioner&#039;s order under section 263 was set aside, without addressing the merits of the disallowance directed by the Commissioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>