<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1245 - Madhya Pradesh High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211864</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal concerning the interpretation of the Dy. Director of Inspection&#039;s powers under s. 131(1A) of the IT Act to refer to the Valuation Officer. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Department&#039;s appeal was upheld, emphasizing that the Dy. Director did not exercise the powers in question. The authorities focused on factual aspects of the case, including construction valuation elements, ultimately rejecting the DVO&#039;s report in favor of an approved valuer&#039;s assessment. The Court concluded that the question raised did not align with the case&#039;s facts, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1245 - Madhya Pradesh High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211864</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal concerning the interpretation of the Dy. Director of Inspection&#039;s powers under s. 131(1A) of the IT Act to refer to the Valuation Officer. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Department&#039;s appeal was upheld, emphasizing that the Dy. Director did not exercise the powers in question. The authorities focused on factual aspects of the case, including construction valuation elements, ultimately rejecting the DVO&#039;s report in favor of an approved valuer&#039;s assessment. The Court concluded that the question raised did not align with the case&#039;s facts, leading to the appeal&#039;s dismissal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>