<?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>2008 (10) TMI 666 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184134</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the order of the CIT (A) due to invalid proceedings under section 158BD and lack of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the conditions for assuming jurisdiction were not met, rendering the proceedings invalid. As a result, the Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the additions made by the A.O. and ultimately ruled in favor of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 13:24:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 666 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184134</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal, upholding the order of the CIT (A) due to invalid proceedings under section 158BD and lack of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the conditions for assuming jurisdiction were not met, rendering the proceedings invalid. As a result, the Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the additions made by the A.O. and ultimately ruled in favor of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=184134</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>