<?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 (9) TMI 42 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347285</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the delay in re-filing appeals, justifying the reasons for the delay. Regarding the ITAT&#039;s decision to remand for cross-examination, the Court set aside the order, emphasizing that the Assessee had provided sufficient material and there was no need for further examination. The Court restored the appeals to the ITAT for a fresh decision, highlighting that the ITAT should have considered the matter itself due to the availability of relevant details with the AO.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487779" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 42 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347285</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the delay in re-filing appeals, justifying the reasons for the delay. Regarding the ITAT&#039;s decision to remand for cross-examination, the Court set aside the order, emphasizing that the Assessee had provided sufficient material and there was no need for further examination. The Court restored the appeals to the ITAT for a fresh decision, highlighting that the ITAT should have considered the matter itself due to the availability of relevant details with the AO.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347285</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>