<?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 (8) TMI 822 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236530</link>
    <description>The ITAT allowed both the revenue and assessee appeals for statistical purposes, directing the AO to re-examine the evidence and decide the issues afresh. The judgment stressed adherence to procedural rules, particularly Rule 46A of IT Rules, 1962, to ensure proper examination of all evidence by the AO before reaching a decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 09:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198937" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 822 - ITAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236530</link>
      <description>The ITAT allowed both the revenue and assessee appeals for statistical purposes, directing the AO to re-examine the evidence and decide the issues afresh. The judgment stressed adherence to procedural rules, particularly Rule 46A of IT Rules, 1962, to ensure proper examination of all evidence by the AO before reaching a decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236530</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>