<?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>2013 (2) TMI 69 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220659</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, directing the A.O. to rectify the typographical error in the return filed under Section 172(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized that the final assessment under Section 143(3) superseded the provisional assessment under Section 172(4) in line with the Supreme Court decision, ensuring the correct taxable amount was considered.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194021" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 69 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220659</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal and partly allowed the assessee&#039;s cross-objection, directing the A.O. to rectify the typographical error in the return filed under Section 172(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal emphasized that the final assessment under Section 143(3) superseded the provisional assessment under Section 172(4) in line with the Supreme Court decision, ensuring the correct taxable amount was considered.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>