<?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 (1) TMI 733 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170758</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment emphasized the significance of documentary evidence, legal precedents, and compliance with legal provisions in assessing the validity of assessments and depreciation claims. It highlighted the Assessing Officer&#039;s discretion in evaluating claims and the requirement for substantial evidence to contest assessment orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Mar 2015 11:16:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 733 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170758</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner&#039;s order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment emphasized the significance of documentary evidence, legal precedents, and compliance with legal provisions in assessing the validity of assessments and depreciation claims. It highlighted the Assessing Officer&#039;s discretion in evaluating claims and the requirement for substantial evidence to contest assessment orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>