<?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>2012 (4) TMI 594 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174790</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to frame the block assessment order due to the absence of a valid search warrant in the name of the assessee. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the block assessment order and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the deletions made by the CIT(A) on various additions related to undisclosed income and unexplained investments. The order was pronounced on 26th April 2012.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jun 2017 18:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 594 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174790</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer lacked jurisdiction to frame the block assessment order due to the absence of a valid search warrant in the name of the assessee. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the block assessment order and dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the deletions made by the CIT(A) on various additions related to undisclosed income and unexplained investments. The order was pronounced on 26th April 2012.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>