<?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>2005 (10) TMI 268 - ITAT NAGPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70918</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision annulling the assessment due to lack of jurisdiction. It was found that the CIT(A) failed to address the merits of the case and did not follow the provisions of section 124 of the IT Act. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with the Act&#039;s provisions in jurisdictional matters and remanded the case for fresh consideration on the unaddressed merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2012 11:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109254" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 268 - ITAT NAGPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70918</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the CIT(A)&#039;s decision annulling the assessment due to lack of jurisdiction. It was found that the CIT(A) failed to address the merits of the case and did not follow the provisions of section 124 of the IT Act. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of complying with the Act&#039;s provisions in jurisdictional matters and remanded the case for fresh consideration on the unaddressed merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>