<?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>CIT&#039;s reclassification of allowed amount as contingent liability seen as opinion shift; jurisdiction principles don&#039;t support it.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22175</link>
    <description>Revision u/s 263 -opinion of CIT in treating the amount already allowed as contingent liability can certainly be considered as change of opinion. On the principles governing the issue of jurisdiction, we cannot uphold the direction of the Ld. CIT - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2015 08:06:26 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2015 08:06:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379216" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CIT&#039;s reclassification of allowed amount as contingent liability seen as opinion shift; jurisdiction principles don&#039;t support it.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22175</link>
      <description>Revision u/s 263 -opinion of CIT in treating the amount already allowed as contingent liability can certainly be considered as change of opinion. On the principles governing the issue of jurisdiction, we cannot uphold the direction of the Ld. CIT - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2015 08:06:26 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=22175</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>