<?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>2010 (9) TMI 93 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78781</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the income tax appeal, ruling that the procedure under Section 144 was not necessary post-revised return and notice of proceedings. The appellant&#039;s challenges to additions based on biri leaves consumption and application of legal procedures were deemed unwarranted, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal. The court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision to add Rs.1 lac due to irregular tendu leaves consumption under Section 145, despite partially allowing the appeal on excess tobacco consumption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116885" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 93 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78781</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the income tax appeal, ruling that the procedure under Section 144 was not necessary post-revised return and notice of proceedings. The appellant&#039;s challenges to additions based on biri leaves consumption and application of legal procedures were deemed unwarranted, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal. The court upheld the ITAT&#039;s decision to add Rs.1 lac due to irregular tendu leaves consumption under Section 145, despite partially allowing the appeal on excess tobacco consumption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>