<?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>2015 (1) TMI 248 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255049</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the Assessing Officer&#039;s order for the assessment year 2006-07 was reasonable and not erroneous or prejudicial to the Revenue&#039;s interest. The Court found no legal flaws in the Tribunal&#039;s factual findings, dismissing the appeal as no substantial question of law was raised. The initial consideration of Rs. 2.7 crores for share purchase, in line with the agreement terms, was deemed appropriate, leading to the dismissal of the appeals without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2015 06:43:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 248 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255049</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision that the Assessing Officer&#039;s order for the assessment year 2006-07 was reasonable and not erroneous or prejudicial to the Revenue&#039;s interest. The Court found no legal flaws in the Tribunal&#039;s factual findings, dismissing the appeal as no substantial question of law was raised. The initial consideration of Rs. 2.7 crores for share purchase, in line with the agreement terms, was deemed appropriate, leading to the dismissal of the appeals without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>