<?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>2002 (7) TMI 251 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71181</link>
    <description>The Tribunal quashed the order of the CIT under section 263, holding that the AO had acted judiciously based on discussions with the Department. It was found that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are independent, and the incorrect charging of interest could have been rectified under other provisions of the Act. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the order under section 263 was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:23:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=109513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 251 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71181</link>
      <description>The Tribunal quashed the order of the CIT under section 263, holding that the AO had acted judiciously based on discussions with the Department. It was found that penalty proceedings and assessment proceedings are independent, and the incorrect charging of interest could have been rectified under other provisions of the Act. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the order under section 263 was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71181</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>