<?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>2019 (3) TMI 1115 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377094</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the revision order u/s 263 and upholding the original assessment order. The Tribunal determined that the Assessing Officer correctly distinguished between business loss and speculation loss, allowing them to be carried forward separately. The Tribunal concluded that there was no error in the AO&#039;s computation, leading to the restoration of the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:50:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1115 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377094</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the revision order u/s 263 and upholding the original assessment order. The Tribunal determined that the Assessing Officer correctly distinguished between business loss and speculation loss, allowing them to be carried forward separately. The Tribunal concluded that there was no error in the AO&#039;s computation, leading to the restoration of the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>