<?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 (10) TMI 683 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349528</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the grounds related to limitation and jurisdiction but allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. It admitted additional evidence regarding property disputes, remitting the matter for fresh assessment by the assessing officer, potentially involving the District Valuation Officer. The assessing officer was directed to reassess capital gains considering the additional evidence and address the issues on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:18:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=492741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 683 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349528</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the grounds related to limitation and jurisdiction but allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. It admitted additional evidence regarding property disputes, remitting the matter for fresh assessment by the assessing officer, potentially involving the District Valuation Officer. The assessing officer was directed to reassess capital gains considering the additional evidence and address the issues on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349528</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>