<?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 (9) TMI 999 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179580</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revision order under Section 263, finding that the Assessing Officer had not properly examined the seized computer backup data, leading to an erroneous assessment. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals against the revision orders but allowed the appeal against the consequential order for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess the matter after thorough examination and verification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 999 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179580</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax&#039;s revision order under Section 263, finding that the Assessing Officer had not properly examined the seized computer backup data, leading to an erroneous assessment. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals against the revision orders but allowed the appeal against the consequential order for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to reassess the matter after thorough examination and verification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>