<?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>2007 (11) TMI 637 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183637</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, finding in favor of the assessee and dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Court determined that the AO had not adequately considered the evidence presented by the assessee and rejected the plea for remand, stating it would cause unnecessary delay and harassment. The Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:03:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 637 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183637</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the decision of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal, finding in favor of the assessee and dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Court determined that the AO had not adequately considered the evidence presented by the assessee and rejected the plea for remand, stating it would cause unnecessary delay and harassment. The Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose in the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183637</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>