<?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 696 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205512</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT, Mumbai condoned the delay of 92 days in filing appeals by the assessee against composite orders of CIT(A) for individual and HUF assessment years. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering genuine reasons for delay and prioritizing substantial justice, remitting the matter back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits. The appeals of the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 696 - ITAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205512</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT, Mumbai condoned the delay of 92 days in filing appeals by the assessee against composite orders of CIT(A) for individual and HUF assessment years. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering genuine reasons for delay and prioritizing substantial justice, remitting the matter back to the CIT(A) for a decision on the merits. The appeals of the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>