<?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 (5) TMI 1172 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328191</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld several additions made by the AO, dismissing the assessee&#039;s claims of errors in the annual return and recording of purchases. The CIT(A) was directed to decide certain issues independently instead of remanding them to the AO. The appeal challenging the timeliness of the assessment order was dismissed as it fell within the limitation period. For the assessment year 2005-06, both parties&#039; appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, while for 2006-07, both appeals were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 May 2016 19:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429893" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1172 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328191</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld several additions made by the AO, dismissing the assessee&#039;s claims of errors in the annual return and recording of purchases. The CIT(A) was directed to decide certain issues independently instead of remanding them to the AO. The appeal challenging the timeliness of the assessment order was dismissed as it fell within the limitation period. For the assessment year 2005-06, both parties&#039; appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, while for 2006-07, both appeals were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>