<?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>2011 (4) TMI 1459 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193145</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the jurisdictional issue first and remanded the legal aspect for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized that the objection regarding lack of jurisdiction should be decided first, as per established legal principles. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the legal aspect to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, while also allowing the appeal for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jul 2017 11:28:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=481327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1459 - ITAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193145</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the jurisdictional issue first and remanded the legal aspect for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized that the objection regarding lack of jurisdiction should be decided first, as per established legal principles. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the legal aspect to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, while also allowing the appeal for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>