<?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 (6) TMI 848 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329139</link>
    <description>The Court dismissed the appeal against the order dated 31st March, 2009, which had initially dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal. The Court found in favor of the assessee, highlighting the lack of merit in the additions made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Despite considering imposing costs on the revenue for the abuse of power by the assessing officer, the Court refrained from doing so due to the absence of the respondent during the proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:06:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432607" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 848 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329139</link>
      <description>The Court dismissed the appeal against the order dated 31st March, 2009, which had initially dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal. The Court found in favor of the assessee, highlighting the lack of merit in the additions made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Despite considering imposing costs on the revenue for the abuse of power by the assessing officer, the Court refrained from doing so due to the absence of the respondent during the proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329139</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>