<?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>2018 (11) TMI 1549 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371206</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals, directing the Assessing Officer to adjudicate only the issue of gold bar purchases from Basma Jewellers, which required further verification. The Tribunal found that the allocation of expenses among different units had already been adequately examined during the original assessment proceedings and set aside the CIT&#039;s revision order on this issue as lacking proper jurisdiction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 07:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544755" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1549 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371206</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the assessee&#039;s appeals, directing the Assessing Officer to adjudicate only the issue of gold bar purchases from Basma Jewellers, which required further verification. The Tribunal found that the allocation of expenses among different units had already been adequately examined during the original assessment proceedings and set aside the CIT&#039;s revision order on this issue as lacking proper jurisdiction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371206</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>