<?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>2016 (1) TMI 237 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270445</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer exceeded jurisdiction by levying late filing fee under Section 234E while processing the statement under Section 200A before the amendment date of 01.06.2015. The Tribunal emphasized that the fee should be levied separately under Section 234E and not as an adjustment under Section 200A before the specified date. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee based on this interpretation and consistent views in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2016 23:42:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 237 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270445</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer exceeded jurisdiction by levying late filing fee under Section 234E while processing the statement under Section 200A before the amendment date of 01.06.2015. The Tribunal emphasized that the fee should be levied separately under Section 234E and not as an adjustment under Section 200A before the specified date. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee based on this interpretation and consistent views in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>