<?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>2017 (6) TMI 125 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343854</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the Assessing Officer had sufficient grounds to believe income had escaped assessment. Additionally, the tribunal determined that the compensation received on contract cancellation was a revenue receipt, taxable in the relevant assessment year. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed, affirming the reassessment and tax treatment of the compensation as revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jun 2017 10:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=470809" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 125 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343854</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, ruling that the Assessing Officer had sufficient grounds to believe income had escaped assessment. Additionally, the tribunal determined that the compensation received on contract cancellation was a revenue receipt, taxable in the relevant assessment year. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed, affirming the reassessment and tax treatment of the compensation as revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>