<?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>2012 (9) TMI 119 - ITAT, PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216305</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order in a tax case due to procedural irregularities regarding the admission of additional evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following Rule 46A and providing a fair opportunity for the assessee to present their case. The decision was based on procedural grounds rather than substantive issues, highlighting the need for adherence to prescribed rules in the appeal process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=189687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 119 - ITAT, PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216305</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s order in a tax case due to procedural irregularities regarding the admission of additional evidence. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following Rule 46A and providing a fair opportunity for the assessee to present their case. The decision was based on procedural grounds rather than substantive issues, highlighting the need for adherence to prescribed rules in the appeal process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>