<?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 (2) TMI 696 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271991</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee. It held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) as the value declared by the assessee exceeded the fair market value. The Tribunal dismissed other grounds raised by the assessee as not pressed. The order was pronounced on 15-01-2016.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 07:43:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 696 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271991</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed all three appeals filed by the assessee. It held that the Assessing Officer (AO) lacked jurisdiction to refer the matter to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) as the value declared by the assessee exceeded the fair market value. The Tribunal dismissed other grounds raised by the assessee as not pressed. The order was pronounced on 15-01-2016.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271991</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>