<?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>1964 (7) TMI 46 - High Court Of Andhra Pradesh</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193248</link>
    <description>An admitted appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, even if later dismissed as time-barred, still amounts to the appellate order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner being made the subject of an appeal. The statutory scheme under the Income-tax Act, 1922 treated appeal to the Tribunal and revision to the Commissioner as alternative remedies, so choosing one excluded the other. Because the assessee had in fact preferred, and the Tribunal had admitted and disposed of, the appeal, revision under section 33A(2)(c) was incompetent. The refusal to entertain the revision was therefore upheld, and the writ petition failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:59:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482062" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1964 (7) TMI 46 - High Court Of Andhra Pradesh</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193248</link>
      <description>An admitted appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, even if later dismissed as time-barred, still amounts to the appellate order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner being made the subject of an appeal. The statutory scheme under the Income-tax Act, 1922 treated appeal to the Tribunal and revision to the Commissioner as alternative remedies, so choosing one excluded the other. Because the assessee had in fact preferred, and the Tribunal had admitted and disposed of, the appeal, revision under section 33A(2)(c) was incompetent. The refusal to entertain the revision was therefore upheld, and the writ petition failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 1964 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193248</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>