<?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>1999 (5) TMI 74 - ITAT NAGPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70783</link>
    <description>A firm&#039;s registration was held valid where the prescribed forms and partnership deed were filed on time and the statutory conditions for registration were satisfied. The return describing the firm as unregistered was not treated as conclusive because the first scrutiny assessment allowed examination of the return, declaration forms and deed together. The objection based on section 183(b) was rejected as irrelevant since that provision had not been invoked or applied by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal also noted that registration is determined under the statutory scheme through a separate valid order and cannot be refused merely because the result may reduce revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:09:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109120" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 74 - ITAT NAGPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70783</link>
      <description>A firm&#039;s registration was held valid where the prescribed forms and partnership deed were filed on time and the statutory conditions for registration were satisfied. The return describing the firm as unregistered was not treated as conclusive because the first scrutiny assessment allowed examination of the return, declaration forms and deed together. The objection based on section 183(b) was rejected as irrelevant since that provision had not been invoked or applied by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal also noted that registration is determined under the statutory scheme through a separate valid order and cannot be refused merely because the result may reduce revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>