<?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>2014 (9) TMI 356 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251330</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s orders and remanded the matter to the AO for re-adjudication. The AO was directed to make necessary enquiries with the Excise Department, obtain relevant evidence regarding suppressed sales, and provide the assessee with a proper opportunity to be heard. The subsequent reassessment orders were also set aside, as they were based on the invalidated CIT(A) orders. All appeals of the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2014 08:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364937" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 356 - ITAT LUCKNOW</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251330</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)&#039;s orders and remanded the matter to the AO for re-adjudication. The AO was directed to make necessary enquiries with the Excise Department, obtain relevant evidence regarding suppressed sales, and provide the assessee with a proper opportunity to be heard. The subsequent reassessment orders were also set aside, as they were based on the invalidated CIT(A) orders. All appeals of the Revenue were allowed for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>