<?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>1988 (8) TMI 166 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70643</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the first issue, holding that the CIT had no jurisdiction to revise the order of the ITO under Section 263 of the IT Act. However, on the second issue, the Tribunal upheld the CIT&#039;s order, concluding that the compensation received by the assessee for the loss of empty bottles from the American Company was a revenue receipt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:34:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108987" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (8) TMI 166 - ITAT MADRAS-D</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70643</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal on the first issue, holding that the CIT had no jurisdiction to revise the order of the ITO under Section 263 of the IT Act. However, on the second issue, the Tribunal upheld the CIT&#039;s order, concluding that the compensation received by the assessee for the loss of empty bottles from the American Company was a revenue receipt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>